Skip to main content

Full text of "The Ancestor : a quarterly review of county and family history, heraldry and antiquities .."

See other formats



3 1 

833 01230 6400 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2014 


A Quarterly Review of County and 
Family History, Heraldry 
and Antiquities 

Number IV 






By J. Horace Round 7 


III. The Vandeputs 29 

THE STORY OF A KEY. By the Lord Hylton .... 44 



By Oswald Barron, F.S.A. 61 

THE EARLS OF MENTEITH. By F. A. Blaydes .... 81 


By the Rev. James Wilson 88 

NORTH COUNTRY WILLS. By W. Paley Baildon, F.S.A. . loi 

OUR OLDEST FAMILIES : V. The Leightons 115 


CATHEDRAL. By the Rev. E. E. Dorling {Illustrated). . 120 




{Illustrated) 143 


The Records of Colchester 149 

Early Lancashire Records 151 

The Oriel Register . . . 159 

Armorial Kalendars 161 

The Swordsman and the Sword 166 

Sussex Marriage Licenses, 1 586-1 643 170 

A Little Peerage 171 

Scrope of Danby 173 

The Beginning of the Bewleys 176 



By Mrs. G. E. Nathan {Illustrated) 190 





T^he Copyright of all the Articles and Illustrations 
in this Review is strictly reserved 



The printers wish to express their regret that owing to a mis- 
apprehension on the part of one of their readers the 
references to the notes on pages 21, 22 of Vol. Ill, were 
wrongly placed. The correct references are as follows : — 

[Page 21] 

^ See p. 19 above. 

^ According to their visitation pedigree in Surrey Archaohgtcal Collections^ 
vol. xi. 

^ (3rd ed.) facing p. 256. * Ibid. 

^ *Whitaker/ as above, from Harl. MS. 1394, fo. 200. 
^ Papworth, pp. 861, 872 ; and Burked Landed Gentry. 
7 Ed. Metcalfe. ^ See below. 

[Page 22] 

^ Yet John Lambert, described in the pedigree as * of Woodmansterne,* 
directs in his v^ill (1533) that he is to be buried in the Q\i\xxz\iyard oi Ban- 

2 It is blazoned by Whitaker as * three cinquefoils,' instead of * 3 narcis- 

^ Whitaker*S Craven (3rd. ed.), p. 249 {refen to extract in centre of page). 


The pages of The Ancestor will be open 
to correspondence dealing with matters 
within the scope of the review. 

Questions will be answered, and advice 
will be given, as far as may be possible, 
upon all points relating to the subjects 
with which The Ancestor is concerned. 

While the greatest care will be taken 
of any MSS. which may be submitted for 
publication, the Editor cannot make him- 
self responsible for their accidental loss. 

All literary communications should be 
addressed to 

The Editor of The Ancestor 
2 Whitehall Gardens 

Westminster S.W 


THE little village of Chawton lies some two miles from 
Alton along the London road. At this end Alton 
straggles, unlovely with gasworks and a modern church, but 
ends suddenly without villa outposts, and Chawton, a pretty 
village with cottages of the old fashion, is well reached by a 
road bordered with trees. Chawton House is an ancient one 
lying on the hillside beyond the village, the chief house of a 
manor, with a little church upon the slope below it. 

For some seven generations Chawton House was the seat 
of a Hampshire family of the name of Knight, which came to 
an end in 1679. Every succeeding owner has borne their 
name, and the continual failure of heirs and the appearance 
again and many times again of a new kinsman of the original 
stock to make his home in Chawton and to carry on the old 
name and shield is one of the most interesting stories to the 
genealogist and antiquary. 

The Knights were possibly men of the Hampshire lands. 
The name recurs at early dates amongst the witnesses to deeds, 
but it is frequent in many parts of the country. The arms as 
borne by the old house of Chawton were a green shield with a 
golden bend engrailed or ' bend lozengy ' as the later heralds 
came to style it ; but the evidence of the shield is of little value, 
as the same or like arms were assumed by different families of 
the name after the haphazard fashion of Tudor armory. They 
were borne by an Edmund Knight who was Norroy King of 
Arms in the reign of Elizabeth, and they were also credited 
during the herald's visitation of London in 1634 to a family 
of Knights in Kent, London and Essex who had come from 
Calais, together with a crest of a demi-monk or friar with his 
hood pulled over his head and a lantern in his hand, a crest 
evidently standing for a figure of Night. Between the family 
of Norroy, the family from Calais and the family at Chawton 
no known connection exists. 

At Chawton we begin surely with one William Knight, who 
on 19 November, 1524, had a grant of the site of the manor, 
with its demesne lands, and from that date the name is settled 



at Chawton, which was formerly a manor of the St. Johns. 
William Knight is succeeded by his son ' John Knight, the 
builder of what is now the oldest part of Chawton House. 
The hall of his building remains, and his building date of 1 533 
is still to be seen over the old stables before the house. 

John Knight is followed by his son, another John, who in 
1 55 1 purchased the site of the manor and the demesne lands 
which had been leased to his grandfather. The son of this 
John the younger, one Nicholas Knight who died in 1585, 
completed the purchase of the manor in 1578, by which time 
we may assume that the family had come to the condition of 
squires or gentry. 

The growing fortunes of the house are marked by the 
shrievalty of Nicholas's son John Knight, who serves as High 
Sheriff of Hampshire in 1 609. He dies without issue, and 
Chawton passes to a younger ' son, Stephen Knight, High 
Sheriff in 1622. John Knight, Stephen's son and heir, dies 
childless, and Richard his brother succeeds, leaving another 
Richard his son, seventh in descent from our William of 1 524, 
and last of his house. 

The family ends at its highest point of prosperity. Richard 
is knighted and marries with a knight's daughter. Little is 
known of his life, but we may believe that he was a known 
'malignant,' for his name figures in the list of those chosen 
out of Hampshire for the honour of that cavalier order of the 
Royal Oak, which he who had hidden in the oak planned but 
never brought to be. In this list Richard Knight's name is 
followed by an estimate of his income at 1,000 yearly. In 
1679 he was one of six knights, all members at one time of the 
proud corporation of Winchester, and in that year he dies 
without a child to succeed him at Chawton, where his portrait 
still hangs, of which portrait we are enabled by the kindness of 
the now Knight of Chawton to give an illustration. 

If we may trust the painters of that day we English were 
in the seventeenth century a handsome race and a dignified. 
Richard Knight makes no exception to the rule. His is the 
easy face of one who would have been styled a good liver and 
an honest householder, and it is fairly set off by his peruke and 
laced cravat and the breastplate and pauldrons in which our 
ancestors of the Restoration loved to be painted, although the 
plates themselves were passing to the lumber room and the 
blacksmith's scrap heap. 

Sir Richard Knight. 

Sir CHRisroi'HKR Lkwkenor, 


Wife of Richard Lewkenor. Or. 1648. 


Now begins from the death of Sir Richard Knight the 
curious story of Chawton and its many heirs of many names. 

Sir Richard's aunt, Mary Knight, had been married to an 
Oxfordshire man, Richard Martin of Ensham, and when Sir 
Richard casts about for a heir he chooses Richard Martin, a 
grandson of this marriage, to be his devisee of Chawton with 
its manor and lands. With Richard Martin a great old family,, 
that of the Lewkenors of Sussex, comes to be associated with 
Chawton. Richard Martin's father, Michael Martin, had 
married Frances, elder daughter and coheir of St. Christopher 
Lewkenor, knight, the recorder of Chichester, by Mary 
daughter of John May of Rawmere. 

Sir Christopher was a stout cavalier who had been in arms 
for the king, and had been knighted in 1644, being then a 
colonel in the king's service. A known malignant, he was 
declared a traitor by the Commonwealth, which ordered his 
lands to be sold. He was son of a distinguished lawyer. Sir 
Richard Lewkenor, Chief Justice of Chester. His grandfather 
was Chief Justice of Wales and a cadet of the historic house of 
the Lewkenors, descendants of Roger Lewkenor of Horsted 
Keynes, sheriff of Surrey under Edward L The Lewkenor 
pedigree, a pedigree upon which expert research is sadly needed, 
shows a long line of knights, sheriffs of Surrey and Sussex 
and parliament members. They were a soldierly race, casting 
themselves freely in the strife of the Roses and fighting for 
King Henry at Bosworth. Their matches were with the 
noblest of their shire. Sir Thomas Lewkenor married with 
the daughter and heir of Sir Edward Dalyngruge, founder of 
Bodyam Castle, by his wife the heir of the Wardeuxs and the 
Bodyams of that ilk. His son. Sir Roger Lewkenor, matched 
himself with Eleanor, the sister and coheir of Hugh the last 
Lord Camoys. From Roger, a younger son of this marriage, 
came, by four descents, our Sir Christopher Lewkenor. Sir 
Christopher's picture by Vandyke is at Chawton, but the most 
important relic there of the Lewkenors is the wonderful 
carpet hanging upon the wall made for them in 1564 and 
enriched with shields of the great Lewkenor alliances. When 
a hundred years old this carpet was sent by a lady of the dying 
family of Lewkenor to the Knights of Chawton as to the 
nearest of her blood, to be kept as an heirloom at Chawton. 

The strange fate of the house has now fastened upon 
Chawton, which does not remain for a second generation with 



these new lords. Richard Martin takes the name of Knight 
and dies unmarried in 1687. His brother and heir, Charles 
Martin, takes the name of Knight and dies unmarried in 1702. 
Elizabeth their sister and heir succeeds them, and with her the 
Lewkenors come again into the stor}', for her husband, William 
Woodward, was son of Sir Christopher's younger daughter by 
Edward Woodward of Fosters in Surrey. Her husband, by 
whom she had no issue, took the name of Knight. So also 
did Bulstrode Peachev, an uncle of the first Lord Selsey, who 
was her second husband, by whom in 1735 "^^^ again left 
a childless widow. At the last died Elizabeth Knight in 1737, 
leaving Chawton away to Thomas May of Godmersham Park, 
with whom begins a fourth family of Knight of Chawton. 

With Elizabeth Knight in i'"3", Knights of Chawton 
who could show a descent from the family's first founder come 
to an end. Thomas xVlay is a cousin after the broad Scottish 
sense. He is not a May. Xo one in this remarkable pedi- 
gree bears their own name for long. Sir Christopher Lew- 
kenor's wife had been a daughter of John May of Rawmere. 
Her brother Christopher May left a daughter and heir, Anne, 
who married William Brodnax of Godmersham in Kent, whose 
son is our Thomas May, whose name of Brodnax became May 
in 1727 and Knight in 1738. 

The Brodnax family was an old one in that fifth division 
of the world — Romney Marsh. At an early date we find 
them at Hythe and Burmarsh, and they were matching them- 
selves with families of knightly rank in the sixteenth century. 
Thomas Brodnax, afterwards Thomas May and at the last 
Thomas Knight, was grandson to William Brodnax of God- 
mersham, who had married a daughter of the Digges family of 
Chilham. William Brodnax was knighted soon after the 
restoration, and was fourth in descent from Thomas Brodnax, 
the first of Godmersham. 

Thomas Brodnax alias May alias Knight was High Sheriff 
of Kent in 1-29 and rebuilt his ancestral house of Godmersham, 
about 1732. He lived on until 1781, leaving one surviving 
son Thomas Knight of Chawton and Godmersham. In him the 
curse of Chawton was once again fulfilled, for he died without 
issue in 1794. 

This last Knight, with his pedigree before him, had to seek 
out a kinsman who should follow him in the lands and name. 
For this purpose a long iourney from bough to bough of this 

Till': Lrwken'ur Ji!:\\i<:i, oi- Jiii<: Baih 


Richard (Martin) Knight. 

Da. ME pR I sen. LA K.\k;ht. 

By Lcly. 

t — 


banyan tree of allied families was necessary. His mother, 
Jane Monk, was eldest daughter and coheir of William Monk 
of Shoreham by Hannah his wife, daughter and coheir of 
Stephen Stringer of Goudhurst in Kent. Stephen Stringer's 
wife Jane was daughter to John Austen of Grovehurst and of 
Broadford in Horsmonden, who died in 1705, and sister to 
another John Austen, whose son William Austen was father 
of the Reverend George Austen, whose third son Edward 
Austen, third cousin to Thomas Knight of Chawton, was 
chosen by him to succeed him at Chawton. 

With this Edward Austen begins the last dynasty of 
Knight of Chawton. He was born of a Kentish family of 
the same class from which all his predecessors had been drawn, 
the now all but vanished class of the small squires and gentle- 
men and yeomen living on and by their estates. The Austen 
pedigree begins in Horsmonden where John Austen of Broad- 
ford died in 1620, leaving eight sons to the founding of the 
family. His fifth son Francis Austen, who afterwards lived 
at Grovehurst, was grandfather to Jane Austen, the wife of 
Stephen Stringer, and to John Austen, great-grandfather to the 
new owner of Chawton. Under James I. the family bought 
of the Whetenhalls the manors of Grovehurst, Hoathe, 
Smeethes and Capell, together with a seat called Broadford, 
where they lived for several generations. 

The Austens were a naval family at the time in our history 
when a career at sea offered the most glorious of possibilities, 
but it is not their sea-captains who carry them to the Valhalla 
of the Dictionary of National Biography, Fame has come to 
their name through the doings of a home-keeping lady of the 
house, for Edward Knight's sister was no less a Jane Austen 
than the Jane of Pride and Prejudice, to whose memory our 
publishers offer a yearly sacrifice of a new edition. She wrote 
of the life she lived amongst, and in her pages we may imagine 
ourselves in a picture gallery without a catalogue, hung with 
nameless Austens, Bridgeses, Brodnaxes and Knights. 

Edward Austen became thus Edward Knight of Godmer- 
sham and Chawton. He was High Sheriff of Hampshire in 
1 801 and died at a good old age in 1852. His miniature por- 
trait is amongst our illustrations. His wife, a daughter of Sir 
Brook Bridges of Goodnestone, died forty-four years before him, 
leaving behind for a delicate and sufficient memorial her beau- 
tiful miniature by Cosway. His eldest son Edward succeeded 



him at Chawton, served as High Sheriff in 1822, reached his 
father's great age, and died leaving his eldest surviving son by 
his second marriage to follow him at Chawton. This son is 
Montagu George Knight, the present lord of Chawton, by 
whose kindness we are enabled to give our readers yet another 
row of pictures from the walls of an English country house. 

Floreat domus^ but with the memory before him of the dead 
and gone Knights, Martins, Woodwards, Peacheys, Mays and 
Brodnaxes who have passed away in fulfilling the hungry fate 
which has followed this house, one who bears the name of 
Knight of Chawton must needs carry a memorial that the life 
of a family is but a fleeting and uncertain thing. 

Edward Knight, son of Rkn'. Gkorge Austen. 
Ob. 1852, .ET. 85. 

Elizabeth, daughter of Mk haee Martin 
OF Ensham, Oxfordshire. She took the 
NAME OF Knight on ihe death of her 

broth l',R CHRTSTOrHER, I\ 1702. Ob. 1737, 

.E r. 64. 


Bkidges, Bart., wifi- oi' Edward Austex, 

AFTERWARDS KnIGH P. Ob. 1808, .ET. 35. 

C Cos7C',r_v.J 



IT is probably no exaggeration to say that the contest for 
the high office of Lord Great Chamberlain before the 
Committee for Privileges in 1902 was, so far as antiquarian 
learning and feudal law are concerned, the most remarkable 
case of our time. That this solitary survival of the court of 
our Norman kings should have for its root of title a charter 
of Henry I. is of itself notable enough ; but that descendants 
of the original grantee should dispute among themselves, 
before the House of Lords, the right to hold the office under 
Charles I., George IIL, and Edward VII., is an even more 
striking instance of historical continuity. For the rival 
claimants before the Committee in 1902 stood in the shoes of 
rival claimants in 1626. The judges of three centuries ago 
were summoned, as it were, from their graves, and addressed 
once more the House of Lords through the mouths of the 
counsel of to-day. Their law on such a matter as this is not 
wholly ours ; their facts, in the light of our fuller knowledge, 
require much correction ; yet every word that fell from the 
lips of Mr. Justice Doddridge, arguing, as against his brother 
Crewe, that no private entail could affect the descent of an 
office akin to an earldom, was read to the Committee by 
Mr. Cripps. And the reasoning of that great antiquarian 
lawyer, whose massive features are seen in the frontispiece to 
the last volume of 'The Ancestor^ was deemed as sound by 
counsel for the Crown as it was when it turned the scale in 
the days of Charles I. 

I do not propose to discuss here the decision arrived at 
last spring, having already given a sketch of the case in the 
pages of the Monthly Review} But, apart from the direct 
issue at stake, the question as to which of the claimants was 
entitled to this great office — if indeed it had not reverted to 
the Crown, — the arguments before the Committee, and the 

^ June, 1902, pp. 42-58. (There are a few printer's errors in the 
article, due to the proof having miscarried.) 




researches on which they were based, had a bearing on several 
matters of historical importance or antiquarian interest, and, 
above all, on certain questions, as yet unsettled, of peerage law, 
such as the doctrine of abeyance and its development, and the 
value of the recognition by the Crown of dignities or styles 
assumed in error or, at least, on no apparent ground. 

Having volunteered to act as expert for the Crown in the 
case, it fell to my lot to prepare memoranda on some of the 
special points involved and to study the remarkable collection 
of proofs brought together for the claimants and for the 
Crown. Of a copy of this collection I am the fortunate 
possessor, and from it I propose to make some extracts for 
the benefit of the readers of this Review, commenting on the 
evidence which they afford. 


One of the most important discoveries resulting from the 
printing of these documents appears, I think I may safely say, 
to have been detected by no one but myself. Nor, I think, 
has any mention of it yet appeared. This is the more re- 
markable because it strongly supports the contention I ad- 
vanced on behalf of the Crown, a contention which also, as 
among the claimants, may be said to have favoured the Duke 
of AthoU against the other competitors. This contention is 
that the Crown has often recognized in error titles wrongly 
assumed. The question is one of practical and indeed present 
importance, not only in view of claims to dignities on the 
strength of such recognition in the past, but also for its 
bearing on the status of dignities of which the assumption is 
at present recognized in various ways by the Crown. 

It was the Mowbray and Segrave case that definitely 
raised the issue as to what recognition of a title by the Crown 
was needed to prove that an abeyance had been ' somehow or 
other ' ^ determined. I need not here repeat my criticism of 
the amazing decision on this point of the Committee for 
Privileges on that occasion (1877) ;^ the law lords seemed to 
vie with one another in their eagerness to accept as conclusive 
evidence recognition by the Crown, in any form, of the titles 

^ The expression is the then Lord Chancellor's {Studies in Peerage and 
Family History f p. 439). 
2 Ibid. pp. 435-57. 


in question. Their acceptance of such recognition as valid 
could only be explained by their ignorance of the fact that, as 
I have already said, the Crown has frequently recognized 
quite formally, but in error, titles wrongfully assumed ; and 
unfortunately the fact that it had done so, a fact fatal to the 
claimant's contention, was not brought to their notice by the 
representatives of the Crown. 

I have elsewhere given abundant proof of this erroneous 
recognition of peerage titles by the Crown,^ but the evidence 
in the Great Chamberlain case has enabled me to add to it by 
bringing to light the formal recognition by the Crown, in 
Letters Patent of Creation, of no fewer than five baronies, 
every one of which must have been wrongfully assumed. 

John (Dudley) Earl of Warwick and Viscount Lisle was 
created Great Chamberlain for life February 17, 1546-7, by 
Letters Patent of Edward VL On examining this grant for 
life — one of the proofs on which the Crown relied — I observed 
at once that the earl is styled ' Comes Warwici Vicecomes 
Lisle Baro de Somerey et ^yas Dominus Dudley.' Although his 
use of these styles appears to be quite unknown — it is ignored 
even in the Complete Peerage^ which is well informed on these 
matters — the evidence of these Letters Patent does not stand 
alone. When this trusted officer of Henry VIII. was raised 
to the peerage as Viscount Lisle (March 12, 1 541-2), he was 
styled only Sir John Dudley, Kt., in the patent, and no 
baronies were named ; but at dinner, after his creation, in the 
Lord Great Chamberlain's chamber, formal proclamation was 
made of the king's style and of his own, the latter being given 
as ' du noble et puissant Mons*" John Duddelley, Visconte 
Lysley, baron de Malpas, seigneur de Basset de Drayton et 
de Tiasse.' ^ The new viscount was not satisfied even with 
this collection of honours. On August 4, 1 543, he issued a 
patent under the great seal of his office of High Admiral as 
'Viscount Lisle, baron of Malpas and Somerey, K.G., Lord 
Bassett and Tyasse,^ thus adding to his styles that of ' Baron 
of Somerey,' which we have seen assigned to him by the 
Crown three or four years later (February 1 7, 1 546-7). 

To account for his use of these styles we must roughly 

^ Studies in Peerage and Family History ^ pp. loo, 447-8, 450-6. 
^ Letters and Papers, Henry VIII, (1542), xvii. 72, citing Add. MS. 
61 13, fo. 89. 

^ Ibid, xviii. (ii.), 3, from original at Public Record Office. 



grasp his descent. The son of the extortionate and detested 
minister of Henry VII., John Dudley, as he rose higher and 
higher in the world, afforded a remarkable illustration of two 
conflicting tendencies. On the one hand he was eager him- 
self to show that he was no mere upstart, but a member of a 
house entitled to ancient feudal honours. On the other, the 
men who envied his rise, and the ' ancient nobility ' doubtless 
as well, were busy spreading the tale that he was really of 
plebeian origin. For we must not forget that if the ' new 
man ' has been apt at all periods to seek for himself a pedi- 
gree, malice and jealousy have been apt also to detract from 
the origin of those who have risen greatly in the world. I 
was recendy sent a precise narrative of the origin of a certain 
ducal house less than two centuries ago. It was utterly irre- 
concilable, of course, with all the peerage books, but appeared 
to be a straightforward story with no malice about it. Yet a 
short examination convinced me that its facts were sheer in- 
vention, and that the whole tale sprang from the tendency of 
which I have spoken. The alleged humble origin of the two 
families in question had no foundation in fact. And this 
appears to have been the case with Dudley's origin also. 
Mr. Sidney Lee, who has investigated the matter with his 
usual care, holds, in his ' Life of Edmund Dudley ' for the 
Dictionary of National Biography^ that John's grandfather was 
a younger son, as John himself formally certified, of a Lord 
Sutton de Dudley, and was not, as the spiteful story ran, a 
mere carpenter of Dudley. In the Complete Peerage this view 
is accepted by G. E. C, but those who may wish to learn more 
of a matter body discussed when Dudleys were high in favour 
may refer to Twamley's History of Dudley Castle and Priory ^ 
where they will find discussed at some length (pp. 25-6, 118- 
21) the views that have been held on the subject.^ 

What is absolutely certain is that John Dudley took 
advantage of the impoverished condition of the head of the 
house to purchase from him Dudley Casde, the ancient seat of 
his Someri ancestors. Twamley held that he did this before 
1543, and even, probably, not later than 1538. Canon Dixon, 
on the other hand, though actually citing Twamley, places the 

^ 'This ambitious nobleman was extremely anxious that it should be 
believed that he was connected with the Sutton family, though he was prob- 
ably descended from a Dudley carpenter' (p. 25). 


Henry, Lord Tyes, 
summoned 1 299-1 307 

, — 

Henry, Lord Tyes, 
summoned 1313-21 

Alice =Warine 



Roger de Someri 
of Dudley Castle 



I s a b e 1 = Richard 

John, Lord 
de Someri, 


Patric of 
Malpas ^ 



Gerard, Lord Lisle, 
summoned 1357 

Margery = John Sutton of Dudley 

de Somen 
elder co-heiress 


Castle, jure uxoris 

John Sutton sum- 
moned as Lord 
Sutton de Dudley 1342 


Sir John 

Warine, Lord 

Margaret = Thomas, Lord 
de Lisle | Berkeley 


Elizabeth = Richard Earl 
Berkeley | of Warwick 

Sir John 

. I 

Sir John 


John, Lord Dudley, 
summoned 1440 as 
Lord Sutton de Dudley 

' — 1 


John, Earl of = Margaret 
Shrewsbury I Beauchamp 


Sir Edmund 

Sir John Talbot 
Lord and Baron 
of Lisle 1444, 
Viscount Lisle 







Lady de 


I 1 

Edward, Lord 


John, Lord Dudley, 
sold Dudley Castle 
to his cousin the 
Duke of Northum- 

John Dudley 
of Atherington, 


sole heir 

(0 . I 

Edmund = Elizabeth Grey = Arthur 

Elizabeth = Sir Edward Grey 

cr. Viscount 
Lisle 1483 


sole eventual ^^^'"J^ Plantagenet 


John Dudley, Viscount Lisle 1 542, 
Earl of Warwick 1547, Duke of 
Northumberland 1 5 5 1 , styled 
* Baron de Somery and Tyas, Lord 
Dudley,' in 1547 

1 She had a moiety of the barony of Malpas in right of her father and another quarter 
in right of her mother. 



purchase apparently in 1552 or 1553.^ The importance of the 
date lies in the fact that John Dudley's assumption of styles 
which could only be claimed (whether rightly or wrongly) by 
the head of his house must have been based on his acquisition 
of the old caput haronia^ Dudley Castle. It will be seen from 
the pedigree on preceding page that the styles of Malpas, 
Somerey and Dudley were all derived from this source ; and 
as he had already, when created a viscount (March 12, 
1541-2)5 assumed the first of the three, his acquisition of the 
castle may be placed before that date. 

Malpas, of course, was the title not of a peerage dignity, 
or even of a pre-peerage baron in capite^ but of one of the 
Earl of Chester's barons in his palatinate. Someri (' Somerey'), 
as will be seen from the pedigree, must have been assumed in 
right, not of a direct, but of a collateral ancestor (summoned 
from 1308 to 132 1), of whom the Suttons of Dudley more- 
over were only the senior co-heirs. There were thus three 
objections to that assumption of this title by Dudley which 
received the formal sanction of the patent of 1547 : (i) it 
would now be recognized as extinct ; (2) if it was not extinct 
it was vested in co-heirs ; (3) Dudley was not, in any case, one 
of such co-heirs. As for the barony of Dudley itself, at- 
tributed to John, Earl of Warwick in the patent of February 
17, 1546-7, it was clearly that which was then vested in 
his grievously impoverished cousin, the head of the house. 

On the other hand the barony of ' Tyas ' or ' Tyasse ' was 
one which (the pedigree shows) the earl must have claimed 
through his mother. But if its attainder in 132 1 was, as 
alleged, reversed some years later, John Dudley was, even so, 
only its senior co-heir, and the title apparently had not been 
heard of for more than two centuries. The Beauchamp co- 
heiress through whom he derived his share in its representa- 
tion gave him an excuse for adopting Warwick as the title of 
his earldom, for using as a badge the bear and ragged staff of 
its earls, and for powdering his guidon ' with ragged stayffes 
of silver.' By a singular coincidence the barony of Tyas, 
Tyes, or Teyes,^ after thus fitfully emerging in its assumption 
by John Dudley, one of its co-heirs, made its appearance 
anew in 1660, when George Monck was created Duke of 

^ Dictionary of National Biography. 

^ The latinized form of the name in early days, viz. * Teutonicus,' has 
sometimes puzzled antiquaries. 


Albemarle and Baron Monck of Potheridge, Beauchamp and 
Teyes, George Monck, like John Dudley, was a man of 
gende birth, but wished, on rising rapidly in rank, to accen- 
tuate the fact by selecting titles indicating ancient descent. 
His ancestor Thomas Monck of Potheridge had married a 
half sister {ex parte materna) of John Dudley, and though he 
could not take, like him, Warwick for a title — that earldom 
being then held by the Rich family — he obtained Albemarle, 
a Beauchamp title, and added to his baronial styles Beauchamp 
and Teyes. These of course were new creations, for he was 
not even a co-heir of Beauchamp or of Teyes. In October 
1688 his titles became extinct, and six months later a barony of 
Teyes was among the peerage dignities bestowed by William III. 
on Marshal Schomberg. This barony is described by Court- 
hope and by G. E. C. as ' Teyes, co. Middlesex,' ^ but I think 
that this is a misapprehension, and that it was merely a revival 
of one of Monck's titles, senselessly bestowed on Schomberg 
after the fashion of the time. 

Dudley's reason for not assuming his mother's barony of 
Lisle was doubtless, as suggested by Courthope and others, 
followed by G. E. C, that he had alienated the manor of 
Kingston Lisle, the possession of which was then necessary 
to a claimant of that title. Moreover it was virtually repre- 
sented among his peerage dignities by the Viscountcy of Lisle. 
For his assumption of the barony of Basset of Drayton it is 
not easy to account. The heirship to the last baron is a matter 
of some difficulty ; indeed, in the last volume of The Ancestor 
two contradictory versions of that heirship are, apparently, given 
(pp. 166, 217). It is, in any case, an interesting addition to 
the history of that title, which was also assumed by the family 
of Shirley, and to such good purpose that when their heir- 
general was created Earl of Leicester (1784), his possession 
of the barony was formally recognized in the patent ! Here 
was a case precisely parallel to the recognition, by the patent 
of 1 547, of John Dudley's assumptions, and on it Courthope 
thus comments : — 

An instrument has thus been allowed to issue under the Great Seal, in 
which three Baronies are recognized to be vested in an individual, to neither of 
which he was legally entitled ; and what is no less extraordinary, one of the 

^ Complete Peerage, vii. 380. * County Middlesex' should apply only, I 
think, to the accompanying earldom of Brentford. 



said dignities has never existed since the reign of Edward I., and another was 
at that moment entirely vested in other persons.^ 

Yet this is the sort of evidence that will have to be accepted 
as decisive if the Mowbray and Segrave judgment is allowed 
to have any weight. 

When the Earl of Warwick surrendered in his turn the 
Lord Great Chamberlainship it was bestowed for life on 
William (Parr), Marquis of Northampton, by Letters Patent 
of February 4, 1550. In this patent I at once detected the 
recognition by the Crown of two more assumptions. For in 
it the grantee is styled ' Marchio Northampton' comes Essex* 
dominus Parre domims Mermyon dominus Seintquintin et de 
Kendall.^ Here again we have two assumptions of no small 
interest, both of them unknown to the compiler of the Com- 
plete Peerage, The pedigree which I have constructed opposite 
will show that Sir William Parr was a junior co-heir of the 
Lords FitzHugh, who were junior co-heirs of the Lords 
Marmion and sole heirs of the barony of St. Quintin, if such 
a barony existed. 

It is a singular fact that the barony bestowed on Sir 
William Parr was at first actually believed to be that of 
FitzHugh. John Hussey wrote that he heard that Sir 
William Parr ' shall be Lord Fytzhyw,' ^ and on the very 
day of his creation (March 9, 1538-9*) the same correspondent 
actually asserts that he has been made ^ Lord Fytzhywe.' ® 
His assumption of the Marmion barony presents no difficulty, 
but that of the St. Quintin title is very curious. For a Com- 
mittee for Privileges to-day would certainly not consider that 
he had any right to it, even as a co-heir. There was in the 
first place but one summons, with no proof, it would seem, 
of sitting ; and in the second this summons was to a Parlia- 

* Compare Complete Peerage, i. 258. 

^ I do not lay stress on Kendal being here entered as if it were a separate 
title. The Parrs had for some generations been *of Kendal,' and William 
Parr is usually stated to have been originally created Lord Parr of Kendal. It 
is pointed out however by G. E. C. (vi. 69, note b) that he seems to have been 
created Lord * Parr ' simply. I would suggest that, when his uncle was created 
Lord Parr *of Horton ' (23 Dec. 1543), it became necessary to distinguish 
his own barony of Parr as that of Parr * of Kendal.' 

^ Letters and Papers, Hen7y Fill. (1539), xiv. (i.), 179. 

* This has hitherto been undetermined. 

^ Letters and Papers, Henry Fill. (1539), xiv. (i.), 187. 


John, Lord Marmion, 
summoned to Parlia- 
ment 1313-22, 
ob. 1322-3 

John, Lord Marmion, 
summoned to Parlia- 
ment 1326-35 

ob. s.p. 

Joan Marmion 
mar. Sir John 

Avice Marmion 
mar. (as his 
second wife) 
John, Lord Grey 
of Rotherfield 

Herbert de St. 
Quintin of Frome 
St. Quintin sum- 
moned 1294, 
d. 1303 (but 

see the text) 

Grey alias Marmion 

Sir Robert Grey = Lora de St. 
alias Marmion I Quintin 

Elizabeth Grey = Henry, Lord FitzHugh, 
sole heir I ob. 1425 

William, Lord Fitz 
Hugh, ob. 1452 

Henry, Lord Fitz 
Hugh, ob. 1472 

Richard, Lord 
FitzHugh, ob. 
circ. 1508 

Alice FitzHugh, 
co-heir, mar. Sir 
Thomas Fienes 


George, Lord Fitz 
Hugh, ob. s.p. 1515 

Elizabeth Fitz 
Hugh, co-heir, 
mar. William Parr 
of Kendal 


Sir Thomas 
Parr of Kendal 

Sir William=Ann 
Herbert | Parr 

Earls of 

Sir William Parr, 
created Lord Parr 
1539, Marquis of 
Northampton 1547, 
styled * Lord Marmion and 
Lord St. Quintin ' 1550, 
ob. s.p. 

Queen Katherine 
Parr ob. s.p. 

1 6 


ment recognized as of very doubtful validity, namely that of 
22 Edward I. (1294)/ Moreover the descent, as it stands, 
appears to be clearly erroneous when compared with that of 
Marmion. One or more generations seem to be omitted, 
but the pedigree as I give it is that which is accepted in the 
Complete Peerage and elsewhere. Although the assumption of 
this title by William Parr has been overlooked, Courthope, 
followed by G. E. C, mentions that the Earls of Pembroke 
(his sister's heirs) assumed it. The singular question now 
arises whether the present Earl of Pembroke could not claim 
the barony, urging that, according to the judgment in the 
Mowbray and Segrave case, the patent of 1550 is proof that 
the abeyance of the barony had ' somehow or other ' been 
determined in favour of the Parr co-heir, and that such deter- 
mination involved the existence of this barony, and, in conse- 
quence, the validity of the writ of 1294 and the absence of 
any necessity for proving a sitting under it. Would not 
that be a pretty question for the Committee for Privileges 
to decide ? 

Attention may be drawn to another case, not indeed of 
formal recognition in error by the Crown, but of the formal 
use of the style of a barony by a peer who would be only 
recognized as one of its co-heirs. John Beke of Eresby, 
Lines, was summoned to Parliament in 1295 1296. Any 
right to a barony under these summonses fell into abeyance 
(by the modern doctrine) between his two daughters at his 
death.^ These were Alice, wife of Sir William Willoughby of 
Willoughby (whose son and heir obtained all Eresby), and 
Margaret, wife of Sir Richard Harcourt of Stanton Harcourt.^ 

^ See the observations under * Clyvedon ' in Courthope's Historic Peerage. 
It may be useful to add that there was some discussion on writs of summons 
to this Parliament in the Wahull case (1892). I am indebted to Mr. Lind- 
say, K.C., one of the counsel in the case, for the loan of the Minutes of 
Evidence, in which I noted this (pp. 64 et seq.). 

^ See Complete Peerage, i. 304 ; viii. 141, 306. 

^ See Coll. Top. et Gen. iv. 344-5, where nothing is said of Margaret's 
heirs. In the Complete Peerage (i. 304) she is styled * ancestress of the Earls 
Harcourt.' It may be worth noting, therefore, that her representation soon 
passed, with an heiress, from the Harcourts to the Astleys of Pateshull, Staffs., 
with whom it remained till some century and a half ago, when it fell among 
co-heiresses, of whom the eldest has since been represented by the Earls ot 


No assumption of ^ Beke ' as a title is mentioned, it would 
seem, in the Complete Peerage^ but the evidence in the Great 
Chamberlain case brings to our knowledge the fact that at the 
Coronations of James IL, William and Mary, and Anne, 
Robert Earl of Lindsey (then Great Chamberlain) styled him- 
self ' Baron de Willoughby Beke et Eresby,* ^ in his petitions 
to the Court of Claims, and that his son Peregrine, Duke of 
Ancaster, used the same styles, before the Court of Claims, at 
the Coronation of George 11.^ Doubtless some document 
could be found proving that the Crown took him or his father 
at their own valuation in the matter, and that the abeyance of 
the barony of Beke had, consequently, ' somehow or other ' 
been determined. The point has an interest of its own, 
because the Willoughby barony dates only from 13 13, while 
that of Beke would be assigned to 1295 or 1296. This has a 
direct bearing on G. E. C/s suggestion that ' it is very possible 
that the precedence of the Barony of Beke (1295) was allowed 
to that of Willoughby, and that the summons of 1 3 1 3 may be 
looked on in the light of a termination of the abeyance ^ of 
the Barony of Beke in favour of the Willoughby co-heir/* 

But nothing is so surprising as the petition of the Earl of 
Oxford to the Court of Claims of Charles II. (similarly printed 
among the proofs from the Coronation Roll), in which he is 
allowed to style himself ' Seigneur Bolebeck Stanford [i.e. 
Sandford] Badlesmere et Scales grand Chamberlaine d'Angle- 
terre,' although his right to the whole of these titles had been 
notoriously disallowed in 1626 ! ^ 

Law, we must remember, is not always equivalent, as 
alleged, to common sense, and although the historian would 
at once recognize the importance of the fact that the Crown 
has recognized the assumption of dignities in error, the lawyer, 
it would seem, does not. So, at least, I gathered when pre- 

^ This curious combination seems to be parallel to William Parr's * domi- 
nus Mermyon, dominus Seintquintin et de Kendall.* 
^ Coronation Rolls of these Sovereigns. 
^ This is dangerously modern language. 

* Complete Peerage, viii. 141, note (b). Compare the suggestion as to the 
Barony of Teyes being really the origin of that of Lisle (these dignities have 
been dealt with above) in vol. vii. p. 381, note (a). 

^ * Scales ' was not expressly named on that occasion, but any right to it (as 
senior co-heir) had passed away from the Veres, with the other baronies named, 
in 1526, according to that decision. 



paring the evidence for the Crown in the Lord Great 
Chamberlain case. Not much stress, I learnt, could be laid 
on the evidence of such recognition as bearing on the recog- 
nition, undoubtedly in error, by Queen Mary and Queen 
Elizabeth of the hereditary right of the Earls of Oxford to 
the Lord Great Chamberlainship. Yet, as I have said, the 
value of Queen Elizabeth's acceptation of their claim to that 
office is shown by the fact that she had recognized in no less 
formal a manner their right to a viscountcy and two baronies, 
all of which they had assumed in error, as was duly decided 
by the judges in their opinions delivered to the House of 
Lords (1626)/ In a great indenture of entail (1575) the 
parties thereto are styled 

Edward de Veer, Erie of Oxenforde, Lord Great Chamberlaine of 
England, Viscount Bulbeck and Lord of Badlesmere and Scales, of thone partie, 
and the right honorable Thomas Erie of Suffolk, Viscount Fitzwater, Lord 
Egremonde and Burnell ... Sir William Cordell knight master of the Rolls, 
and Thomas Bromley Esquier the Quenes majesties Solicitor Generall of 
thother partie. 

The whole of the titles here italicized in a formal indenture 
to which the Master of the Rolls and the Solicitor-General 
were parties were mere wrongful assumptions ; and if it be 
urged that here at least they were not formally recognized by 
the Crown, I reply that by a writ of Privy Seal (June 8, 1588) 
Queen Elizabeth granted Earls Colne Priory ' Edwardo de 
Veere comiti Oxon vicecomiti Bulbeck magno Camerario Anglie 
domino de Badlesmere et de Scales' ^ We have only to italicize 
also the words ^ magno camerario Anglie ' to solve the whole 
problem of the Lord Great Chamberlain case. This the 
historian certainly would do ; the lawyer, it seems, would not. 
Here as elsewhere, in my own experience of this historic case, 
I could only say with good reason : * If this is law, give me 


The grants for life only of the Great Chamberlainship of 
England, made in the reigns of Henry VIIL and of Edward VL, 
were among the most keenly discussed documents in the case. 
For the whole history of its descent was upset by the discovery, 

^ See Monthly Review (as above), pp. 52—3, and compare p. 1 7, note 5, above. 
^ These documents are in the possession of the Rt. Hon. James Round, M.P. 


established on this occasion, that the Earl of Oxford who 
was known to have held it from 1526 to 1540 had done so, 
not by hereditary right, but only under a grant for life. Thus 
was solved the great difficulty which had always surrounded 
the descent, for this earl, though heir-male of his predecessor 
in the earldom, was not, as the earls had been till then, heir- 
general under the charter by which Henry I. granted the 
Great Chamberlainship, and had, therefore, no hereditary right 
to that great office/ This discovery was frankly admitted in 
Lord Ancaster's ' case,' where we read, ' It has now been 
ascertained that the King in the first instance granted this 
office for life to John, Earl of Oxford, who died 1540/ 

Before this fact had been discovered it was difficult to 
account for the circumstance that this earl had not been suc- 
ceeded by his son and heir in the office of Great Chamber- 
lain. When the right to the office was disputed in 1660, some 
rough notes were compiled for the use of Montagu, Earl of 
Lindsey, then Great Chamberlain, and in these the above 
difficulty was thus accounted for : — 

John the 6th of that name was Earle of Oxford and Lo. Great Chamber- 
laine of England and lived till 7th Eliz., and by reason he was not so wise as 
his ancestors and came seldom to co(u)rt the office of Great Chamberlaine was 
granted to John, Earl of Warwick, Viscount Lisle, for life, etc., etc. 

I have seen the absurd document from which this quota- 
tion is taken, but it will probably be enough to say that it 
places the life grant of the office to Robert, Earl of Sussex in 
32 Henry VIII. before what is known as the Award, which 
famous and hotly discussed record it assigns to ^ 33 H. VIII.', 
though its date is well known to be ten years earlier (23 
Henry VIII.). This alone will be sufficient to show the 
worthlessness of such a document, of which the writer was 
obviously at sea. Yet this amazing document was actually 
printed in full among the proofs of Lord Ancaster*s case. 

That I have not, in so describing it, spoken too strongly 
will be evident from this extract from Speeches delivered by 
Counsel (pp. 183-4) : — 

Attorney General. My Lords, there is only one other document, that is of 
much later date, on which I ought to say a word or two in this connexion ; it 
is a document which was read by my learned friend, Mr. Haldane, — it is at 
page 188 of this same volume. . . . [reads extracts]. 

^ See chart pedigree of the Earls of Oxford on next page. 


Lord Davey. What has that reference to ? 
Attorney-General. I do not know, my Lord. 
Lord Davey. Does anybody know ? 

The Lord Chancellor. It purports to refer to an Act of Parliament ? 
Attorney-General. Yes, my Lord, the year of which is not given [!] . . . 
Lord James of Hereford. What evidence is there for this document ? 
Attorney -General. No evidence whatever. 

Lord Chancellor. I take it that it would not be evidence at all. If you look 
at it, it does not purport to be the original document at all. . . . 

Attorney -General. Yes, my Lord. I called attention to the fact that this 
was not evidence when my learned friend, Mr. Haldane, began to read it, but 
your Lordship said that it might be taken for what it is worth, and I submit 
it is worth nothing ; so far as it goes the assertions are so wild that they rather 
turn the case the other way. 

Nevertheless, as was pointed out by the Attorney- 
General — 

it seems to have started the idea, which was exploited by some of my 
learned friends, that the sixteenth Earl was not so wise as some of his ancestors, 
and that that accounts for these life grants that were made by Henry VIII. and 
Edward VI. 

The argument of Lord Ancaster's counsel to this efFect was 
unlucky, for its baseless character was easily shown. But it 
had the effect of introducing the most diverting evidence by 
which the case was enlivened. And, oddly enough, not con- 
tent with disparaging the intelligence of the earl (1540-65), 
who was ' not so wise as his ancestors,' counsel — * by mistake,' 
perhaps, as the Attorney-General suggested — disparaged that 
of his predecessor and kinsman, the fourteenth Earl ! A chart 
pedigree is needed to make the kinship clear. 

John, 1 2th Earl of Oxford 

John, 13th Earl of Oxford, 
ob. s.p. 1513 

Sir George Vere 

John, 14th Earl of 
Oxford, ob. s.p. 1526 
(' Little John of 

Robert de Vere 

Sir John Vere 

John, 1 5th Earl 
Oxford, ob. 1540 

John, 1 6th Earl of 
Oxford, ob. 1565 


To quote from another part of the Attorney-Generars 

speech : — 

My Lords, it has been suggested in the course of this case that the sixteenth 
Earl, who succeeded to the Earldom in 1540, was not so wise as his ancestors, 
I think, it has been put . . . Three successive earls have been disparaged, 
one, I think, by mistake — the fifteenth for the sixteenth ; but the real intention, 
was to disparage the sixteenth Earl, and to suggest that he was not quite so wise 
as some of his ancestors had been. And your Lordships remember that my 
learned friend, Mr. Haldane, read a good deal of matter evidently with that 
object. I would only refer your Lordships, if I may, to such a source of in- 
formation as the Dictionary of National Biography . . . and I really do not 
know what is the ground for suggesting that the sixteenth Earl was so incapable 
that it would give some sort of colour to the idea that these grants were made 
on account of his particular incapacity.^ 

The first document cited in this connection by Mr. Hal- 
dane was the grant to the Duke of Norfolk (May 29, 1 514) of 
the wardship of the fourteenth earl — known as ' Little John of 
Campes ' (from his Cambridgeshire seat at Castle Camps) — 
who had succeeded his uncle in 15 13, being then a boy of about 
thirteen. After the manner of the time he had already been 
betrothed, but the document recites that, though this was done 
' according to the law of the Church,* the king, on the boy 
becoming his ward, rejected the betrothal as invalid on the 
ground that the young earl had been under fourteen at the 
time, * whereby it appertained to us by reason of our preroga- 
tive to offer and propose to the same now Earl another woman 
as his wife ... to which same Earl ... we offered Margaret 
Courteney that he should take her as his wife . . . which he 
utterly refused.* ^ For this the youth had to pay a heavy fine 
to the king, who, however, bestowed the amount on the Duke 
of Norfolk, by whom the young earl was secured as a son-in- 

Ten years later the young earl and his wife, who had 
attended, in due splendour, the Field of the Cloth of Gold 
(1520), were the subject of the following wonderful ' Order,* 
framed by no less great a person than Cardinal Wolsey himself.^ 

An order made by the reverend Father in God Thomas Woolsey Cardinall 
of England by direccon from the Kinge to Lymitt John Earle of Oxenford in the 
orderinge of his expences of houshold and other his affaires in his yonger 
yeares as allsoe for his demeanor towarde the Countesse his wief in the xv*^ yeare 
of Kinge H. 8. 

^ speeches delivej'ed by Counsel, p. 175. ^ Ibid. p. 19. 

^ Quoted by Mr. Haldane (ibid.). The authority cited is the Hargrave 
MS. 249 (p. 223), and the date of the document is February 16, 1523-4. 



ffirste it is ordered by the most reverend Father in God, Thatt to th' intent 
the said Earle yett beinge younge and nott att anie fordele to maintaine a great 
and ordinarie house maie not onelie by example of other have better experience 
and knowledge here after of such thinges as bee requisite for him to knowe in 
that behalfe but alsoe by spareinge and moderate expences in the beginninge of 
his youth bee more aboundantlie furnished beforehand for the supportacon and 
maintenance of those and other charges when the Cause shall require, and in the 
meane time bee the better able to serve the Kinges grace as shall appertaine, 
The same Earle shall incontinentlie dissolve discharge and breake his houshold, 
Soejouminge hee and the Ladie his wief theire famiilie and servantes hereafter to 
be menciond w'^ His ffath"" in Lawe the duke of Norffolke at such convenientt 
prizes for theire boardes as betw'eene the same duke and the Ladie Dutchesse 
his wief and the said Earle of Oxford by mediacon of his ffreindes can be 
accorded Covenanted and agreed. 

Item it is further Ordered thatt for good Councell to bee givenn and due 
service to bee done vnto the said Earle and the Countesse his wief as well in 
orderinge of his landes as otherwise they shall have the number of officers and 
servants vnder written (viz*) for his landes John Josselin to bee his Audito^ And 
Surv'eio'' and Receiver of the same and for the said service of them 
both one Chaplyn, twoe gent[lemen], sixe yeomen, three Groomes, and three 
horsekeepers w'^^ a page, Twoe Gende Woemen and one Chamberer to attend 
vppon the Ladie his wief, Of w'^^ said menn and women servantes nowe to be de- 
puted chosen and assigned the said Earle of Oxenford shall w^ all diligence 
certifie the names in writeinge vnto the said mioste Reverend Father to the in- 
tentt thatt uppon inquirie and knowledge had of theire sadnes good demean'' and 
fidelity' they maie bee by him approved or not beinge found of such quality 
reiected and accepted And semblablie from time to time the said moste reverend 
Fath"" in God shall approve such officers and serv^antes as hee shall thinke good 
to bee about the said Earle and Countesse his wief for theire most W eale 
Hono"" and proffitte. And them vppon theire merittes or demerites to accepte or 
expell att his pleasure, Wherevnto the said Earle shall at all seasons bee conform- 
able Nott admitteinge or takeinge into his service anie person but such as shalbee 
by the said most reverend Fath"" soe allowed and approved (as aforsaid). 

Item the said officers and servauntes and everie of them from time to time 
being shalbee takenn vsed and ordered as officers and servantes indifferentlie to 
the said Earle and Ladie his wief beinge obedientt to theire service and good 
comandem*" w^outt anie speciall Lymitacon, of anie of the said officers or menn 
serv^auntes to bee either the said Earles or the said Countesses servauntes onelie, 
whereby there should appere or arise anie particuler or partiall distinccon some 
of them to belonge vnto the said Earle and some to the said Countesse. 

Item the said Earle of Oxford shall sadlie moderatelie and w* tem.per- 
ance and discretionn vse himselfe from time to time as well in his expences as 
in his diett, and other his dailie conversacons forbearing to make or passe anie 
Graunte of Annuite office or otherwise but by the advise and consentt of the 
said most reverend Fath"" in escheweinge the greate decaie of his Landes and 
hindrance in his substance, semblably for conservacon of healthe and avoidinge 
sundrie inconveniences hee shall have vigilant regard thatt hee vse not much to 
drink hott wines, ne to drinke or sitte up Late or accustome himself w*'^ hotte or 
unwholsome meates contrary to his complection whereby hee may bee broughte 
into infirmitie and disease. 


Item the said Earle shall alsoe moderate his hunteinge or other Disporte or 
haunteinge or vseinge the same excessiuely daily or customably But onely at 
such tymes and seasons as maie bee convenientt for the Weale and recreacon 
of his Bodie and as by the saddest and moste discreeteste of his servauntes shalbee 
advised and thought expedientt. 

Item in all oth^^ the gestures and behaviours of the said Earle he shall vse 
himselfe hono^'^ prudently and sadlie forbearinge all riotous and w^ild companies 
excessiue and superfluous apparell, And namely hee shall as to a nobleman apper- 
teigneth Loveingly familiarlie and kindlye intreat and demeane himself towarde 
the said Countesse his wief as there may bee perfecte Love Concord and vnitie 
engendered nourished and continevi^ed betweene them as to the lawes of God, 
and for bringeinge forth fruite and childrenn betw^eene them to Gods pleasure doth 
apperteigne, wherein the said Earle shall speciallie see thatt hee give not eare 
and harkeninge vnto simple or euill tongued personns w'^*^ fFor particuler malice 
or to attaine ffavor thankes or otherw^ise shall contrive sedicous and slanderous 
reporte betweene them, But like a Nobleman shall cherishe Loue and entertaine 
the said Countesse his wief w* all gentlenes and kindnes to bee vsed eith' to 
oth' And generallie the said Earle shall discreetly substantially and sadly 
Governe vse behave and order himself in all his actes demeanores gestures and 
proceedings as to such a Nobleman doth and shall appertaine, fFor observacon of 
w''*' premisses deuised by the Kinge speciall comandem* : for the politiq' order- 
inge weale and increase of the said Earle (as aforsaid) Nott onely hee 
standeth Bound w*^ sufficientt suretes to the said most reuerend Path" (Thatt is to 
saie) hee himselfe in the some of Twoe Thousand Powndes and sixe suretes 
everie of them in ffive Hundred markes.^ But alsoe theise presente Articles in 
papers indented Tripartite the one remayneinge w**^ the same most reuerend 
Fath% anoth' w*** the said Earle, and the Third w*^ the Executores of the Laste 
Will and Testam* of the Late Earle of Oxford signed w*'^ all theire Handes bee 
alternately and interchangeably deliuered eith "^to oth', The 16*'^ day of Ifebru- 
arie the 15**" yeare of the Kinges raigne [16 Feb. 1524]. 

F. Carkis. 

John Oxenford.^ Ebor.^ 

After this document, or the bulk thereof, had been read^ 
the chancellor not unnaturally observed : — 

It is very interesting, but I do not know that it seems to reflect any light 
upon the Chamberlainship.^ 

For, as the accompanying pedigree shows, the earl in question 
(1513-26) had nothing to do with the earl (1540-65) whose 
intelligence was impugned.* 

^ They would thus be sureties for 2,000 in addition to the earl's own 

^ These represent the signatures of the earl and the cardinal. 
^ Speeches delivered by Counsel, p. 20. 

* At a later stage the chancellor, with equal justice, remarked : * But it 
was only in respect of Little John that I heard any imputation upon the 
intelligence of any of them' (ibid. p. 175). 


The allusions in this document to Little John's ' hunteinge * 
tempt me to quote from another source an allusion to that of 
his successor, the more especially as any reference to fox- 
hunting as an aristocratic sport at so early a date as this is of 
great rarity and interest. 

Father, I besetch you whan ye meet wyth the ryght honorable lorde ot 
Oxforth, to geve thanks unto hys Lorchyp, for whan he came to a towne 
callyd Yeldam,^ to the parsons there of to hunte the foxe, he sente for me and 
my cossyns, and mad us good schere ; and lett us see schuch game and plesure 
as I never saye in my lyfe.^ 

This delightful schoolboy letter was written to ' Master 
Crumwell ' by his son Gregory, then being taught, with his 
cousins, by the rector of Toppesfield, Essex, from which place 
it is written. One would like to know the name of the jolly 
parson of Yeldham, the parish adjoining Toppesfield, who 
seems to have given Gregory many a ' good time.* The letter^ 
is the more interesting because Mr. Asquith seems to have 
suggested that Cromwell had sinister designs in the matter of 
the Great Chamberlainship and played the earl false in drafting 
' the Award.'* Yet he and Mr. Haldane had both quoted the 
interesting letter of the earl to Cromwell some two years 
after ' the Award, which is addressed ' To his loving friend 
Mr. Cromwell,' and in which he styles him ' My especial 
friend as always you have been.'^ 

We may now pass at last to the sixteenth earl (1540-65), 
the one who, we are asked to believe, was *not so wise as his 
ancestors.' It is to him that the following letter of his 
brother-in-law Sir Thomas Darcy of Chiche (now St. Osyth) 

(27 June, 1547) 

Sir Thomas Darcy to William Cecil. 

After right harte comendaco(ns) these shalbe to advertyse you y* accordynge 
to my late coicacyon had w*^ yow in my lords graces galerye at Westmynster, I 
have by all means y* I can inqryd of ye mater, betwen my lorde of Oxenford 
and the gentillwoman w* whom hee is in Love namyd M*^^* Dorothe late 

^ Doubtless Great Yeldham, of which the living seems to have been then in 
the earls' gift. The parish adjoined Castle Hedingham, in which was their 
ancestral seat. 

^ Ellis' OrigLfial Letters, 3rd ser. i. 339 (No. cxxi.). 

^ It is dated October 15, and assigned to 1531 in Letters and Papers, 
Henry Fill. v. 227. 

* Speeches delivered by Counsel, pp. 150-1. 
^ Ibid. pp. 31-2. 


woman to my Ladie Katheryn his doughter, And uppon coicacyon had them 
bothe, I have founde and doe perceyve them to bee in the same case y* they 
wer in when my said lorde of Oxenforde was befor my lordes grace And non 
other, savynge that the bannes of matrimonye between them were twyse pro- 
claymed in on daye, other treatyse or solempne coicacyon hathe not ben 
before wytnesse but onlye be in secrett between them twayn. Syr yf yt shall 
stande w* my lordes graces pleasure to have this mater further steyd [stayed]. 
As my lorde of Oxenfords honor welthe and preservacyon consideryd, I thynke 
yt very expedyent And maye righte well be, Then I beseche you I maye bee 
therof advertysed. And yt yee will move his grace to dyrecte his lettres to Mr. 
Edward Grene of Sampford in whose house the said Dorothe dothe now 
contynewe commaundinge hym by the same neyther to sujfFre my said lorde of 
Oxenford to have accesse to hyr ne shee unto hym, And that noo prevey 
messengers maye goo between them whyche as I suppose wilbee y^ surest wey 
to stey them. And upon further adv'tysement to be had from hys grace yf 
yt shall so stande w* his pleasure I will entre in coicacyon w my lorde 
Wentworthe for a maryage to bee hadd between my said lorde of Oxenford 
and on of his doughters, And as they uppon sighte w* other treatyce may agree 
soo to procede in the same, Syr uppon yo"^ mocyon to bee made unto my 
lordes grace concernynge the premysses I praye yow I maye bee advertysed by 
this berer of his pleasure in the same, whyche knowen I shall ryghte gladlye 
indevor my syllff to accomplysshe by thayd of the blessed Trynytie who have 
you in his contynewall preservacyon From Hedingham Castell the xxvij daie 
of June [1547] 

By yo' louynge frynde 

Thomas Darcy. 

[Endorsed] From Sir Thomas Darcy, Knight.^ 

The reading of this letter by Lord Ancaster*s counsel was 
followed by this conversation : — 

The Lord Chancellor. I do not quite understand what the meaning ot 
that is. In the first place Lord Oxford was not at that time a minor. 

Mr. Haldane. . . . He cannot have been a very sensible person, I think. 
The Lord Chancellor. He was making love to his daughter's maid. 
Mr. Haldane. Yes, he was certainly doing that. 
The Lord Chancellor. That is a new proof of lunacy.^ 

The student of our old social life will feel grave doubt 
whether ' IVlistress Dorothe ' was a ' maid ' in the modern 
sense of the word. The ' woman ' of a great lady, such as the 
Lady Katheryn, only child of the Earl of Oxford, was herself, 
probably, of gentle birth, and, indeed, is styled a 'gentill- 
woman ' in this very letter. I cannot but think that she was 
a relative, if not indeed a daughter, of the Mr. Green of 

^ State Papers (Domestic), Edward VI. vol. i. No. 45. 
^ Speeches delivered by Counsel, p. 37. 


Sampford, at whose house she is described as residing. The 
Greens of Sampford were of good position and at this period 
received knighthood.^ 

When the earl did marry again he chose for his wife an 
Essex woman who was probably little, if at all, superior to 
* Mistress Dorothe ' in position. For Margery Golding was 
the daughter of a Halsted man, who, although he is entered 
as bearing arms in the 1552 visitation of the county, was 
spoken of by the Duke of Somerset as his 'servant.' This, 
we learn from another document printed in the Great 
Chamberlain case, a letter of October 5, 1 549, addressed ' to 
our loving servant Golding esquyer ' by the duke, who signs 
himself ' your lovinge Lord and Master.' In this letter he 
commits to Golding, ' for the confidence we have in your 
being our servant,' the ordering of the Earl of Oxford's 
' things, servants, and ordynarie power ' for the king's service, 
a precaution probably inspired by the duke's critical position 
as Protector at the time, and his doubts as to the earl's 
support of his policy. In any case it seems to have led to the 
earl's marriage with Golding's daughter before the visitation 
of 1552, when we find Golding entered as the earl's father-in- 
law. Enough has now been said of the very mistaken idea 
that those who were spoken of as ' servants ' or ' women ' 
then and long afterwards could not be of gentle birth. ^ 

When Sir Thomas Darcy wrote the letter printed above, 
his true motive was one which only a genealogist would 
detect. The ' Lord Wentworth,' for one of whose daughters 
he proposed to secure the earl as a husband, was no other 
than his own cousin ! The accompanying chart pedigree will 
show quite clearly the relationship of all the parties. It is of 
some importance to do this, because in the Complete Peerage 
(iii. 22) the first Lord Darcy of Chiche is entered only as son 
' of Roger Darcy (Esquire of the body to Henry VII.) by 
Elizabeth,' his mother's origin being thus ignored, together 
with the very interesting connection that it involved. 

1 See Morant's Essex (ed. 18 16), ii. 525. 

2 In Wolsey's * Order ' (above), it is provided that * Twoe Gentle woe- 
men ' shall wait upon the Countess, but these are spoken of in the next line 
as ^ women servantes,' just as the * twoe gentlemen ' are included, apparently, 
among the men servants. We have an interesting survival of this practice in 
the name of the Queen's * women of the bedchamber,' who are selected from 
the aristocracy (see, for instance, Mr. Lindsay's 'The Royal Household^ p. 217). 


Sir Henry Wentworth 
of Nettlestead 

John, Earl = Elizabeth Roger = Elizabeth 

of Oxford I Trussel 

John Earl 
of Oxford 
d. 1565 

I . 


only child 
by his first 



Elizabeth = Sir Thomas 
Darcy, cr. 
Lord Darcy 
I, of Chiche 

Sir Rob. 

Sir Thomas 
cr. Lord 

Margaret — Sir John 
Wentworth | Seymour 


Earl of Hert- 
ford 1537 
Duke of Som- 
erset 1547 


Henry VIII. 

Edward VI. 


On the other hand it is no new discovery that Sir Thomas 
Darcy had married the earFs sister. Yet this fact, which 
explains some of the documents in the case, does not appear 
to have been mentioned. Sir Thomas had obtained for life 
(1541) the custody of Colchester Castle, which had previously 
been held by his father-in-law, and an extract from the Acts of 
the Privy Council, actually printed among the proofs in the 
case, shows Sir Thomas acting in conjunction with his brother- 
in-law, the Earl of Oxford, and his cousin. Lord Wentworth, 
for the defence of the east coast. Sir Thomas and the earl 
were to have ' thordre of the Kinges Majesties subjects of the 
Countie of Essex,' and — in what might be thought a modern 
colloquialism — the earl was ' to back him with the power of 
the shire,' ^ a responsibility which seems to imply that he was 
in no way deemed by the government a fool. Indeed, a year 
later he was ' thanked for his diligence ' by the council in 
sending soldiers ' to Brykelsey [Brightlingsea] to serve in the 
greate barke.' ^ 

The Duke of Somerset, who, it will be seen, was also a 
cousin of Sir Thomas Darcy, had his own game to play. He 
had himself been created Lord Great Chamberlain for life in 
1 543, but had resigned that high office in February 1 546-7 on his 
nephew's accession to the throne. A year later he completed 

- 1 Acts of the Privy Council^ May 12, 154.5 (cited in volume of proofs, 
fo. 108). 

2 Ibid. May 31, 1546 (proofs, fo. 109). 



an arrangement by which he secured for his son Henry the 
hand of the Earl of Oxford's heiress with all her father's 
possessions. This arrangement took the form of an indenture 
between the duke and earl (Feb. i, 1547-8), which was voided 
after the duke's fall by a special Act of Parliament (Jan. 
1 55 1-2). This Act (with certain omissions) was printed at 
great length among the proofs in the recent case, with the 
object of showing that the earl 'had been frightened into 
executing ' the conveyances of his estates by the threats of the 
duke,^ but no mention was made of the all-important point 
that the whole arrangement was based upon a marriage between 
the duke's son and the earl's only child (see chart pedigree), 
in addition to which I have seen evidence that the earl was to 
receive for his consent a sum of money, which, although he 
was not paid, he subsequently claimed. Modern historians 
are well aware that recitals in Tudor Acts of Parliament 
cannot be accepted as evidence, though Froude would have 
liked to treat them as such, and an Act passed, as this was, 
after the duke's fall, was not likely to speak in favourable terms 
of his conduct. While voiding the rights, under the arrange- 
ment, of ^Lord Henry sonne to the saide late Duke, Ladye 
Katheryn dowghter of the saide now Earle,' the Act contains 
this proviso : — 

Provided allso and be it enacted by thauctoritie aforesaide that yf the saide 
Ladye Katheryn doughter of the saide nowe Earle shall aff^ e her self and 
shalbe maryed by the advyce and Counsaile of the saide now Earle her father 
in his Lieftyme, And yf she shall fortune not to be marryed by the advyce and 
Councell of the saide now Earle in his Lief tyme, yf then the saide Ladye 
Kateryn shall fortune to marrye her self by the advyce and Cawncell of the 
Executors that the saide now Earle shall make and constitute in and by his 
Last will and Testament, or of the more parte of them, That then the saide 
Ladye Katheryn her executors or administrators shall have and perceive by 
auctoritie of this Acte to her owne use towardes her advauncement in her 
marj^age the somme of one thowsande powndes.^ 


1 See Mr. Haldane's speech {Speeches delivej'ed by Counsel, p. 39). 

^ She married Edward Lord Windsor, whose descendant Thomas Lord 
Windsor petitioned the Crown in 1660 for the office of Lord Great Chamber- 
lain on the singular ground that the earl's second wife {nee Golding) had not 
been lawfully married to him, so that he had left * Katherine his only Doughter 
and Heir (by Dorothy, Doughter of the Earl of Westm[or]land, his only 
lawful Wife) who was married to Edward Lord Windsor, Great Grandfather of 
the Petitioner ' {Lords^ Journals, cited in ' Supplemental Documents ' on the 
case, fo. 45). 



VJPUTTE, or Giles 
Vandeputj the founder in 
England of the family of Van- 
deputj was born at Antwerp 
about 15765 his tombstone in 
the church of St. Margaret 
Pattens describing him as aged 
70 at the time of his death. 
Truly an evil year for a baby 
to be born in Antwerp. On 
the fifth of November in 1576 
the marble town hall of Ant- 
werp was a gutted ruin with 
five hundred palaces burning around it. The margrave, the 
burgomaster, the magistrates and senators had met, fighting 
like the stout Flemings they were, a death which eight thou- 
sand of their neighbours had shared. Antwerp, the richest 
and most luxurious city in Christendom, in the day of wrath 
which is called the Spanish Fury, fell to utter wretchedness. 
Six millions of her hoarded wealth was taken by the fire 
which ran amongst her tall houses, and six millions fell into 
the hands of those children of the devil, the Spanish soldiery. 
For that age at least it was all over with the city to which our 
own days have seen trade and wealth returning ; and Antwerp 
must have been a place of nightmares to those survivors who 
had seen the kennels swilled with citizens' blood. A house 
whose splintered door had once let in those who sought and 
found that vast plunder could be no longer a pleasant abiding 
place for the merchant who was left in it with a burnt out 
warehouse and a broken strong box, and with a memory of 
what, as the estates of Brabant testified, ' shall be abominable 
so long as the world stands.' 

The father of Gillis Vandeput is said to have fled from 

29 ^ 



Antwerp to London, but as yet nothing is known concerning 
his movements. The good estate to which his son came 
would point to something of the Vandeput treasures having 
been saved from the burning. Those great houses, a single 
one of which is said to have yielded three hundred thousand 
gulden to the plunderers, must have covered even in ruins 
many a money chest which escaped the seekers. It is certain 
that a bag of money came with the Vandeputs, but the rising 
prosperity of Gillis Vandeput is the first news of the family 
which we gain on this side of the water. His father, if he 
came with his son, must have died before obtaining naturaliza- 
tion. This father is said in the pedigree set down by Morgan 
in the St)here of Gentry to have been one Henry Vandeput, 
who was twice married, first to Elizabeth Hustard, and 
secondly to Mary the daughter of one Napier or Navagheer 
of Ypres, by whom he had our Gillis Vandeput. In Le Neve's 
book of knights Giles Vandeput is described as ' naturalized 
in parP- 21 Jacobi 1°^'.' It is at least worthy ot note that, 
amongst the long list ot strangers made denizens in that year, 
the Patent Roll includes the name of one ' Egidius Adriance,' 
or Gillis Adriaanzoon, which makes it possible that Master 
Morgan, with his mind woolgathering over Joseph's Coat or 
Honour Dative, has blundered over an unfamiliar name, 
making a Henry of an Adrian.^ Some of the Vandeput pedi- 
grees allege that the father of Giles fled to England in 1567 
or 1568, when a hundred thousand of his countrymen fled 
abroad with their money and goods ; but this at least is con- 
tradicted by the monument of the son. 

On the fourth of February i6i-f- Anna, the daughter or 
Giles Vandeput, was christened at the Dutch Church in the 
Austin Friars, the first of Giles's children of whom we have 
record. In 161 8 Giles learns that the Vandeput money bag, 
although safe from the furious Spaniard, has enemies to menace 
it even in the parish of St. Margaret Pattens, where he had 
taken up his abode. The ' strangers,' who are now a flourish- 
ing colony in London, are slandered by envious tongues, and 
the British Solomon upon his throne is seeking his Ophir in 
all likely corners. A vexatious complaint is begun in Hilary 
term of 1 6 1 8 in the court of Star Chamber, and no less than 

1 Henry Vandeput, however, heads the pedigree registered in the last 
Heralds' Visitation of London. 



forty of the outlandish merchants are arraigned by the evi- 
dence of desperate and bankrupt witnesses on a string of vague 
charges, chief amongst which was a charge of impoverishing 
the country by sending bullion out of it. Amongst these 
forty victims we find our Giles Vandeput — evidence enough 
that he is a plump citizen and forward in his world. Better 
evidence of his condition is in the fact that he is fined the 
vast sum of 35OO0/.5 and is glad to escape in 1620 with a pay- 
ment of I5OOO/. 

Giles Vandeput died in London 24 March 1 646, aged 70, 
according to the evidence of the monument over his tomb in 
the church of St. Margaret Pattens. He made a will 6 Feb. 
164I-. By it he gives 25/. each to his three children, Peter 
Vandeput, Sarah, the wife of Nathaniel Parkhurst ; and Giles 
Vandeput. He gives 40/. to the poor of the Dutch Church, 
and 5/. to the poor pensioners of St. Margaret Pattens. The 
residue of his estate he gives to his wife Sarah, his executrix, 
who proved the will 13 April 1647 [P-CC. 68 Fines]. 

The wife of Giles Vandeput was Sarah Jaupin, daughter, 
according to the pedigrees, of John Jaupin of Ypres in 
Flanders. Her surname is proved by the christening entries 
of her children at the church of the Austin Friars, three of 
them being christened as children of Gillis van der Putte by 
Sarah Jaupin his wife. The arms of her family were vert with 
three golden pineapples^ a shield which Rietstap gives to the 
name of Jaupin of Flanders. She was buried with her husband 
in the church of St. Margaret Pattens, and the monument sets 
forth that she was a very learned woman of Ypres, and that 
she died 13 March 165^, aged 67. She made a will 2 Sept. 
1656, being then a widow and of St. Margaret's parish. She 
gave to the poor of the Dutch Church 10/., to the poor ot 
' Rood Church ' (a name of St. Margaret Pattens) 5/., and to 
the poor of Woodford in Essex, 2/. To her grandchild Sarah 
Parkhurst, daughter of Nathaniel and Sarah, she gave 400/., 
to be paid her at marriage ; and the residue of her estate she 
gave to her sons Peter Vandeput and Giles Vandeput, mer- 
chants, whom she made her executors. Peter Vandeput 
proved the will 9 July 1657 [P. CC. 227 Ruthen\ his brother 
Giles being then also dead. 

Giles Vandeput had five children by Sarah Jaupin his 
wife : — 

i. Peter Vandeput, of whom presently (IL). 



ii. Giles Vandeput, christened ii March i6i|- at the Dutch 
Church in the Austin Friars, and died young. 

iii. Giles Vandeput, christened 7 July 1614 at the Dutch 
Church in the Austin Friars. He married 14 Dec. 
16485 at St. Dionis Backchurch, Elizabeth Parkhurst, 
daughter of Sir Robert Parkhurst of Purford in Surrey, 
knight. He was named as an executor in his mother's 
will, but died soon after her in September or November 
1656. He made a will i Feb. 1654-, wherein he de- 
scribes himself as of the parish of St. Martin Orgars 
and a merchant of London. He desired to be buried 
in Rood Church, otherwise called St. Margaret Pattens, 
close by the east wall on the north end of the com- 
mandments, where lay the body of his father 'of 
blessed memory.' He gave legacies to his sister 
Parkhurst and her husband, Nathaniel Parkhurst. 
To his wife, who had a jointure of his lands in Essex, 
he gave his lease in St. Martin's Lane, with plate, and 
household stuff and half his other personal estate. 
The other half he gave to Peter Vandeput his brother, 
to whom he gave the reversion of the Essex lands, 
making him his executor. On 9 Feb. 165I- he added 
a codicil, giving to his wife and her heirs the reversion 
of the manors and lands of Mashbury and Chicknall, 
which he had lately purchased of John Pete, esquire. 
Administration with the will annexed was granted 
8 Nov. 1656 [P.C.C. 257 Berkeley\ to Rowland 
St. John, one of his men, a legatee under his will, for 
that the executor refused to prove the will. On 5 May 
1662 administration d,h,n, was granted to Thomas 
Ewster, exor. of the said Rowland St. John ; and on 
the death of Thomas Ewster further administration 
was granted 31 March 1666 to Benjamin St. John, 
brother of the said Rowland. Elizabeth Vandeput, 
his widow, was married soon after her husband's death 
to Francis Finch, second son of Sir Heneage Finch, 
Baronet. By Giles Vandeput she had no issue. 

1. Anne Vandeput, christened 4 Feb. i6it at the 

Dutch Church in the Austin Friars. She prob- 
ably died young. 

2. Sarah Vandeput, christened 5 March 162-^ at the 

Dutch Church in the Austin Friars. In 1643 


she was married to Nathaniel Parkhurst of 
Woodford in Essex, gent. The allegation for 
the marriage licence bears date 28 Sep. 1643 
[Bp. of Lond.\ he being aged about 24. She 
was a legatee, with her daughter Sarah Clifton, 
in the will of her brother Peter Vandeput, 31 
Jan. i66f. 

II. Peter Vandeput of College Hill in the parish of 
St. Margaret Pattens, merchant, son and heir of Giles Vande- 
put, was christened 2 5 Aug. 1 6 1 1 at the Dutch Church in 
the Austin Friars. He is described as a rich man, speaking 
many tongues, the knowledge of which he may have gained 
from the ' learned lady ' his mother. He married Jane Hoste, 
daughter of Dierick Hoste of London and of Sandringham 
in Norfolk, a merchant, who like his son-in-law was of the 
' strangers,' being son of Jacques Hoste of Middleburg in 
Zeeland, who was born at Gudenaarde in Flanders. He was 
buried by his parents in the church of St. Margaret Pattens, 
and from his monument we learn that he died 9 Feb. i66f, 
aged 57. He made a will 31 Jan. i66|, describing himselt 
therein as a merchant of London. He directed that lands to 
the value of 10,000/. should be purchased by his brother-in- 
law Theodore Hoste, and his friends Mr. John Colvile, gold- 
smith, and Mr. Robert Clayton, scrivener, which lands were 
to be settled upon Jane his wife for her life, with remainder 
to his son Peter. He gave to his wife his messuage on 
College Hill, which had descended to him from his father 
Giles Vandeput. To his daughter Jane Vandeput he gave 
4000/. at her full age or marriage. He gave a legacy to his 
cousin Bartholomew Hamey, M.D., whose position in the 
pedigree is uncertain. This will was proved i March i66f 
[P.C.C. 27 Coke] by Jane Vandeput, the relict and executrix. 
She died 4 Feb. 167I-, aged 53, and was buried by her 
husband in St. Margaret's Church. Her will is dated 13 Oct. 
1670, and it was proved 18 Feb. 167I [P.C.C. 28 Pye] by her 
son Peter Vandeput the exor. To this son she gave the 
messuage on College Hill, given her by her husband. She 
gave 2,000/. more towards the portion of her daughter Jane 
Vandeput, and names her brother Theodore Hoste, esq., and 
her friend Robert Clayton, the scrivener, who writes out the 
wilL This Robert Clayton is now an alderman of London. 
He died a knight, ' vastly rich,' having, according to Peter le 



Neve, come up to London as a poor boy, the son of a joiner 
at Bulwick in Northamptonshire. 

Peter Vandeput had issue by Jane Hoste his wife, accord- 
ing to their monumental inscription, seven children, of whom 
two only survived their parent : — 

i. Sir Peter Vandeput of whom presently (III.)* 

ii. Sarah Vandeput, who is named as the eldest daughter in 

Morgan's pedigree, 
ii. Jane Vandeput, who was born about 1654. She was 
married 6 May 1674, at St. Olave's in Hart Street, to 
Edward Smith of Hill Hall in Essex, the allegation for 
the license being dated 4 May 1644 \Vica7 GenL\ 
She died 28 July 1720, and was buried at Theydon 
Mount. Her husband, who was christened 28 Sep. 
1637 at Thaxted, succeeded his father as second 
baronet of his family, and was High Sheriff of Essex 
in 1680. He died 24 June 1713, and was buried at 
Theydon Mount i July 17 13. His will, dated 
24 July 1 7 12 was proved i July 17 13. From the 
issue ot this marriage spring the Smiths, baronets of 
Essex, who have added Bowyer to their name of 
Smith, which name a grotesque misapprehension of 
the ancient written character has urged them to write 
of late years as ' Smijth.' 
III. Sir Peter Vandeput of London and of Richmond in 
Surrey, knight. He was a minor at the death of his father, 
but must have been of full age at the date when he proved 
his mother's will, and was probably so at the date of its 
making in 1670. He was therefore born about 1649 1650. 
He was Sheriff of London in 1684, holding the office jointly 
with Sir William Gosselin, and being knighted at Whitehall 
26 Sep. 1684 [Le Neve]. He married Margaret Buckworth, 
daughter of Sir John Buckworth of West Sheen in Richmond, 
knight, an alderman of London, who brought 800/. a year 
into jointure. He died in 1708, and was buried in St. Mar- 
garet's Church, leaving a will dated 10 May 1707, wherein 
he is described as of Richmond. He gave 4,000/. each to his 
son and daughters, Peter, Hester, Anne and Sarah Vandeput, 
all being minors. He also named his daughters Jane, wife of 
Mr. Philip Jackson, and Elizabeth, wife of Mr. Robert van 
Sittart. He gave to his wife Margaret his leases in Long 
Acre, his share in the New River Company, his messuages 


and lands in Tower Street, his leases in Gracechurch Street 
and in St. James's, Westminster, and his messuages and barge- 
houses in Lambeth. This will was proved 30 April 1708 
[P.C.C. 102 Barrett\ by Margaret, the relict and executrix. 
In 1720 she set forth a bill of complaint in Chancery against 
one William Taylor [C.P. before 17 14, Sewell 35] concern- 
ing her leasehold house in St. James's Street, of which she 
had lately had Sir Richard Steele for a tenant. She made 
her will 6 Jan. 1731-5 being then of St. Giles's-in-the-Fields. 
She desired to be buried by her husband in St. Margaret's 
Church. She gave legacies to her son Sir Peter Vandeput, 
baronet, and to his lady and children ; to Dame Jane Jackson 
and her children at home, and to her daughter Jane, wife of 
Anthony Corbiere, esq. ; to her grandsons Philip and John 
Jackson ; to her son-in-law George Baker, esq., and his wife 
(Elizabeth) ; to her son-in-law Henry Ewer, esq., and his 
children (excluding his son's wife) ; to her son-in-law Mr. 
William Dunster [who was a merchant of St. Mary-at-Hill 
parish in 1724] ; and to her son-in-law Robert Holford, esq., 
and his wife and children. She gave her leasehold estate in 
Leadenhall Market and Gracechurch Street to her son Peter, 
he paying 250/. yearly to her daughter Elizabeth Baker for 
life ; and she gave him also her leaseholds in St. James's, 
Westminster. She names her sister Elizabeth Hartopp. She 
made her son Sir Peter Vandeput her residuary legatee and 
executor, who proved the will 15 Jan. 173! [P.C.C. 23 Hench- 

Sir Peter Vandeput and Margaret Buckworth his wife are 
said to have had no less than twenty-two children, a fertility 
which boded, as in other like cases, the coming extinction of 
the family. Of these children we can reckon some eleven, 
four sons and seven daughters. 

i. Sir Peter Vandeput, first baronet, of whom presently 

ii. Edward Vandeput, christened at Richmond 2 June 1690 

and buried there 4 June 1690 as 'Mr. Edward Van- 
deput, a child.' 

.i^i. Thomas Vandeput, christened at Richmond 15 Dec. 
1694 and buried there 4 Nov. 1695. 
iv. Thomas Vandeput, christened at Richmond 25 July 1696 
and buried there 29 July 1696. 



i. Jane Vandeput, wrongly called Mary in most of the 

pedigrees. She is said to have been born in 1679. 
She was married at Richmond 2 March 169I- to Sir 
Philip Jackson of Richmond, knight, a Turkey mer- 
chant, by whom she had issue five sons and five 
daughters, the ' Richmond beauties,' of whom Mary 
married Roger Morris, esq., by whom she was mother 
of Colonel Roger Morris, husband of Mary Philipse 
daughter ot the Patroon of Philipsburg, and ancestor 
of the family of Morris of York. His will, dated 
27 May 17 17 (at which date he was not yet a knight), 
with codicils 6 Nov. 1722 and 18 Dec. 1724, was 
proved by her 18 Dec. 1724 [P.C.C. 273 Bolton], 
She died 14 Aug. 1731. Her will, dated 3 July 
173 1, was proved 17 Aug. 1731 [P.C.C. 211 Ishani] 
by William Dunster, her brother-in-law, power being 
reserved, etc.^ to Anthony Corbiere, esq., the son-in- 
law (who had married her daughter Jane in 1722), the 
other executor. 

ii. Elizabeth Vandeput. She is said in the pedigrees to 

have been born in 1683. She is named in her father's 
will of 1707 as wife of Mr. Robert van Sittart. He 
was son of Peter van Sittart, who came to London 
from Danzig at the latter end of the seventeenth cen- 
tury, the ancestor of Lord Bexley. He was born 2 6 June 
1679, married Elizabeth Vandeput 15 April 1707. 
He died 20 Dec. 17 19, s.p. His will, dated 29 March 
1717, was proved 12 Jan. 171^ [P.C.C. 20 Shaller\ he 
being then of Shottisbrooke, co. Berks. His widow 
was married at Richmond i Aug. 1728 to George 
Baker of Richmond, afterwards of Brockenhurst House, 
CO. Hants, who died in 1770, s.p. 

iii. Hester Vandeput, a minor at date of her father's will. 

She married Henry Ewer of Bushey Hall, co. Herts, 
and of Richmond, esquire. Allegation for marriage 
licence 4 July 1709 \Fac. Off.\ Their son Anthony 
was christened at Richmond i June 17 10. 

iv. Anne Vandeput, who was christened at Richmond 1 6 

March 169-j and died young. 
V. Anne Vandeput, christened at Richmond 28 June 1693. 
Wife of W^illiam Dunster of St. Mary-at-Hill, London, 


vi. Sarah Vandeput, christened 28 Dec. 1697 at Richmond. 
She was wife ot Robert Holford, esq., a Master in 
Chancery, son of Sir Richard Holford, by whom she 
had five children. She was married to him in 1717, 
the allegation for the marriage licence being dated 25 
April 1 717 [Fac, Off,] he being then aged about thirty, 
a bachelor, and of Lincoln's Inn. His will, dated 
II Nov. 1752, gave her his house in Bedford Row. 
She proved the will 22 Jan. 1753 [P.C.C. 22 Searle]. 
vii. Margaret Vandeput, christened at Richmond 20 July 
1699 buried there 16 July [sic] 1699. 
IV. Sir Peter Vandeput of Twickenham, co. Middlesex, 
and afterwards of Standlynch, co. Wilts, first baronet. He 
was a minor in 1707 at the date of his father's will, and was 
created a baronet 7 Nov. 1723. He married in 17 12 
Frances Matthew, one of the daughters ot Sir George 
Matthew, of Southwark and Twickenham, knight. The in- 
denture of settlement before marriage was dated 25 July 1712, 
whereby she brought a marriage portion of 6,000/. On 3 Dec. 
1725 she set forward a bill in Chancery (by Edward Parthe- 
riche of Ely, esq., her next friend) on behalf of herself and of 
Peter, George and Frances, her only surviving children, against 
her husband and others, concerning the provisions of this 
marriage settlement, and the settlement of the Vandeput lease- 
holds in 'Elme Field alias Long Acre' [Chan, pro, ante 17 14 
Sewell 13 10]. Sir Peter Vandeput bought the estate at Stand- 
lynch I July 1726 of the trustees of the Bocklands of Stand- 
lynch. He died 25 August 1748 at Mayence in Germany, 
and was probably buried in his chapel at Standlynch, as he had 
desired in his will, which is dated 8 May 1747. He gave 
his old capital messuage and lands and houses at Standlynch, 
which were not comprised in his marriage settlement, with his 
new capital messuage there, and his interest in the land in the 
said settlement, to Henry Godde of St. Martin's-in-the-Fields, 
saddler, and Josias Depouthe of Friday Street, merchant, in 
trust to pay to George, the natural son of his son George 
Vandeput, 1,000/., and after that payment to hold the said 
messuages and lands in trust for the testator's said son George, 
with remainder in tail to his heirs male, with remainder to his 
heirs female, and with further remainder to John Jackson ot 
St. Anne's, Westminster, oilman, whom the testator made his 
residuary legatee and executor, and to whom the testator gave 



his leaseholds in Long Acre and elsewhere in St. Martin's 
and St. Giles's, subject to the payment of 250/. yearly to the 
testator's son George during his mother's life. Administra- 
tion, with this will annexed, was granted 10 Jan. 174! 
[P.C.C. 28 Lisle] to George Vandeput the son, the executor 

Dame Frances Vandeput, the widow of Sir Peter, died 
3 March 1764, as we learn from a coffin-plate inscription 
quoted by Hoare in his History of Wiltshire, She was buried 
at Standlynch. She made a will 25 March 1757, which, with 
a codicil dated 22 Feb. i7-||-, was proved 11 April 1764 
[P.C.C. 158 Simpson] by John Upton of Lincoln's Inn, the 
executor. She gave to her son Sir George Vandeput her 
plate, pictures and household goods. To her granddaughter 
Frances Vandeput she gave her gold watch with its seals and 
her fine Japan cabinet with the china upon it. The residue 
of her estate she gave to her executor, John Upton, esq., in 
trust for the education of her said granddaughter, to whom 
the principal was to be paid on her comiing of age. If the 
said Frances should die a minor, the testatrix willed the 
principal to her son Sir George. If he were dead the princi- 
pal was to remain equally to Master George Vandeput, Sir 
George's natural son, and to Miss Philadelphia Geary, the 
said Sir George's natural daughter, both of which children 
were minors in 1757. 

The said Sir Peter Vandeput and Frances Matthew his 
wife had issue, besides other chQdren who died young : — 

i. Peter Vandeput, who died in 1734. Admon. of his 

goods was granted 21 June 1734 [P.C.C] to Sir 
Peter Vandeput, the father. He is described as late 
of Groningen in Holland and a bachelor. 

ii. Sir George Vandeput, second and last baronet, of whom 

presently (V.). 

i. Frances Vandeput, christened at Twickenham 6 Jan. 
i7tu-- She died 14 Dec. 1739 appears by her coffin 
plate at Standlynch, where she was buried. 
V. Sir George Vandeput, the second and last baronet, 
was born about 1 7 1 7. He matriculated at Wadham College, 
Oxford, 31 July 1734, as eldest son of Sir Peter Vandeput 
of Twickenham, baronet, his elder brother Peter being then 
lately dead. He rendered his name famous in its generation 
by fighting a Westminster election in 1749 against Lord 


Trentham, and great store of the hoarded Vandeput guineas 
disappeared amongst the free and independent electors of 
Westminster. From this time forward we hear no more of 
the great Vandeput fortune. The election began 22 Nov. 
1749, the poll closing 8 Dec. 1749, with Trentham leading 
by 4,811 to Sir George's 4,654. Sir George demanded a 
scrutiny, but on 15 May 1750, Lord Trentham was declared 
the elected of Westminster by a majority of 170. The 
Vandeput pedigree was unrolled in the midst of the contest, 
Lord Trentham's supporters professing themselves anxious 
to know whence came this ' Englishman with a Dutch 
name.' The Vandeput faction hastened to produce their 
evidences of nationality, and Sir George was declared to be 
no hungry foreigner, but a man whose ancestor had come 
here in Queen Elizabeth's time with a full money bag. Sir 
George Vandeput married at St. George's Chapel, Hyde Park 
Corner, 20 April 1747, Mary Judith Schutz or Schtitz, 
daughter of Augustus Schutz of Shotover House near 
Oxford, and granddaughter of Baron Schtitz, a Hanoverian 
favourite of George I., whom he followed to England. 
Augustus Schutz, the baron's eldest son, was Master of the 
Robes and Keeper of the Privy Purse to George II., whom 
he had formerly served as equerry. The Schutz family are 
familiar to us through the eighteenth-century memoirs and 
letters. Of Lady Vandeput's younger sister, an attendant 
upon one of the princesses, it is written : — 

Charlotte and Schutz like angry monkeys chatter, 
None guessing what's the language or the matter. 

Augustus Schutz, sometimes called Baron Schutz and some- 
times Augustus Schutz, esquire, was esteemed by some ot 
his contemporaries as a maker of puns, but the verdict of a 
a wider circle pronounced him German dulness in the flesh. 
He died 26 May 1757, and the next day Mr. Horace Walpole 
writes to George Montagu : * I wish your brother and all heirs 
to estates joy, for old Schutz is dead and cannot wriggle him- 
self into any more wills ! ' His daughter, Lady Vandeput, 
died 21 May 1771, at Chelmsford, and on 19 August 
1772, Sir George Vandeput married at Kelvedon in Essex 
his second wife, Philadelphia Geary, youngest daughter of 
Lieut.-Colonel Geary of Long Melford in Suffolk, and the 
mother of Sir George's natural daughter Philadelphia. Sir 



George Vandeput died at Kensington 17 June 1784. His 
will is dated i July 1782, at which time he was living in 
Wigmore Street in the parish of Marylebone. He gave to 
his daughter Frances Drury 50/. for mourning, and for the 
like purpose he gave legacies of 20/. to [his natural son] 
Captain Vandeput of H.M.S. Atlas ^ and 50/. to [his natural 
daughter] Mrs. Philadelphia Smyth. The residue of his 
estate, together with the houses in St. James's Street, Little 
Roper Street and Fox Alley or Court, all in St. James's, 
Westminster, he gave to his wife. Dame Philadelphia, who 
proved the will [P.C.C. 357 Rockingham]. His widow sur- 
vived him two-and-twent)' years, dying 3 Jan. 1806, at Stan- 
hope Street in Mayfair. She made a will 8 March 1804, 
being then of Nottingham Street in Marylebone, which was 
proved 3 Jan. 1806 [P.C.C. 89 Pitt\ by John Woods, esq., 
one of the exors., power being reserved, etc.^ to Richard Very 
Drury, the other exor., who also proved the will 1 1 Mar. 1826. 
She gave legacies to Philadelphia Smyth of Warren Street, 
Fitzroy Square, widow, whom however she does not name 
as her daughter ; to George Vandeput, a clerk in the War 
Office ; and to Emily Camell of Bungay, the widow of 
Admiral Vandeput. 

By his first wife Mary Judith Schutz, Sir George Vandeput 
had issue : — 

i. A son who was born 19 Sep. 1754 and died young. 

ii. Frances Vandeput, born about 1750, who became sole 

heir of the Vandeputs. She was a legatee under the 
will of her grandmother, Frances Vandeput, in 1757. 
She married 13 June 1776 \_Gent.' s Mag.'] Richard Vere 
Drury, a lieutenant in the nav)", the youngest son of 
the Rev. George Drury, rector of Claydon and Aken- 
ham, CO. Suffolk, who came of a cadet branch or the 
Drurys of Rougham. Richard Vere Drury was of 
Kingston near Portsmouth. His wife Frances Vande- 
put, by whom he had three sons and a daughter, died 
23 Feb. 1787, and was buried at Claydon. He married 
secondly, in June 1788, Susan Gibson, daughter of John 
Gibson, rector of St. Magnus by London Bridge, which 
Susan survived him and died at Kingston in Nov. 1835, 
aged 82. Richard Vere Drury died 6 April, leaving 
issue by both wives. 
Sir George Vandeput left two natural children : — 


George Vandeput, of whom presently (VI.), and 
Philadelphia Vandeput, the first mention of whom 
occurs in the will of her grandmother, Dame Frances 
Vandeput in 1757, which will speaks of her as Miss 
Philadelphia Geary, natural daughter ot Sir George 
Vandeput. Her christian name and surname show 
that she was the daughter of Philadelphia Geary, 
whose liaison with Sir George must therefore have 
begun long before her marriage to him in 1772. In 
the wills of her father and mother she is spoken of 
as Mrs. Philadelphia Smyth, and no relationship is 
stated. She was married at Ipswich 14 Dec. 1779 to 
Charles Smyth, a captain in the West Essex regiment 
of Militia, who was born at Lynn Regis in April 1752. 
He was great-grandson of Sir Edward Smith of Hill 
Hall, CO. Essex, by his wife Jane Vandeput, daughter 
of Peter Vandeput (II.). He died in May 1792, 
and was buried at Camberwell, his wife surviving 

VI. George Vandeput, natural son of Sir George Vande- 
put, is the first of his line to find his way into the pages of 
the biographical dictionaries, a measure of fame which even 
the great Westminster election failed to bring to his father. 
His mother's name is uncertain, but as the will of his grand- 
mother. Dame Frances Vandeput, in 1757 names him as her 
son's natural son. Master George Vandeput^ whilst the natural 
daughter of Sir George is called in the same will Miss 
Philadelphia Geary. In spite of this diiference, and in spite 
of the fact that the statement has appeared in print that the 
boy and girl were children of Sir George by different mothers, 
it is at least possible that both were children of Philadelphia 
Geary. His grandfather who gave him 1,000/. by his will 
dated 8 May 1747, and the recognition by his grandmother's 
will in 1757 of both children, would favour the suggestion 
that they were the children of a menage known to, and at the 
least tolerated, by the respectable Sir Peter and Dame Frances. 
His widow and his natural son George are given legacies 
under the will of Dame Philadelphia Vandeput, and he him- 
self in giving a legacy to Philadelphia Smyth, styles her his 
* dear sister.' His naval career was a long one, and like many 
of the captains of his age, most of his life was spent at sea. 
He became lieutenant on 24 Sep. 1759 under Captain Hugh 



Palliser of the Shrewsbury. On 17 April 1764 he was given 
the command of the Goree sloop, and on 20 June 1765 that 
of the Surprize of 20 guns. In June 1767 he was given the 
Gary sporty a 2 8 -gun frigate, on the Mediterranean station, and 
in Dec. 1773 he commissioned the Asia line of battleship for 
the North American station. Whilst lying off New York 
in 1776 he came by an adventure which has made welcome 
material for the biographers of his useful and honourable but 
monotonous career. A powder ship was taken by a tender of 
the Asia^ and Captain Vandeput, instead of transhipping her 
war material on the spot, was moved by some impression of 
suspicion to order her to lay off for the night. The order 
brought a sudden confession from one of the powder ship's 
men, who would have been doomed to pass the night aboard 
her, that a certain barrel held a musket lock actuated by a 
piece of clockwork, which was even then at work and ticking 
its way towards an explosion. So Captain Vandeput brought 
the Asia home in 1777 with sound timbers, and took her to 
the East Indies. In 1782 he did his duty at the relief of 
Gibraltar, being then in the Atlas of 98 guns, and in the same 
year he was in the action off Cape Spartel. Flag-rank came 
to him at last : rear-admiral in 1793 and vice-admiral in 
1794. In the St. Albans he commanded the squadron off 
North America in 1797, removing his flag to the Asia in 
1798. Admiral of the blue 14 Feb. 1799, he ^^^^ suddenly 
on board the Asia at sea on the 14 March 1800, and his body 
was carried in the Gleopatra to Providence, where it was buried 
on shore. He made a will, dated at Halifax 11 Nov. 1799, 
making his wife Emily his principal legatee. He gave legacies 
to his dear sister Philadelphia Smyth, widow, and to his nephew 
Augustus Vere Drury, then his lieutenant in the Asia. Of this 
will he made his wife Emily his executrix, naming his ' particu- 
lar friends ' the Rt. Hon. William Windham, Secretary of War, 
and the Hon. George Nassau as executors with her. The will 
was proved 19 Aug. 1800 by the relict alone [P.G.G. 631 
'Adderley\ His wife's surname is uncertain ; but a niece ot 
hers named in the Admiral's will is called Sarah Walls. In 
October or November 1801 she married as her second husband 
Robert Camell, M.D. of Bungay in Suffolk, the descendant 
of a Scots Campbell who had come southward in the time or 
Elizabeth. She was given a legacy by the will of Dame 
Philadelphia Vandeput in 1804. She died at Bungay 2 Dec. 


1827 in her 69th year, and her husband, who survived her, 
died at Ditchingham 5 July 1837. 

By his wife Emily, Admiral Vandeput left no issue, but 
he is said to have left a natural son George. This George is 
without doubt the George Henry Vandeput named in the will 
of his father as ^ George Henry Vandeput, now a clerk in the 
office of the Secretary of War/ Dame Philadelphia Vandeput 
in her will of 1804 gives a legacy to this ' George Vandeput, 
a clerk in the War Office,' in which office a place must have 
been found for him by his father's ' particular friend,' the Rt. 
Hon. William Windham. 

Admiral Vandeput is said to have assumed the title of 
baronet, but of this we have no trace. He certainly made no 
attempt to insist upon his title being used officially by the 
Admiralty. The story must have originated in the circum- 
stance that Bethams Baronetage accepted without question the 
legitimacy of the recognized son of Sir George Vandeput. 
George Vandeput, whose life and death were at sea, was not 
at hand to suggest corrections in the baronetage, and Dame 
Philadelphia Vandeput could hardly have wished to make 
clear the last generations of the Vandeput pedigree. The 
Admiral's son George, the War Office clerk, is also stated to 
have styled himself a baronet, but this still more vague claim 
must have contented itself with modest and private assertion. 

O. B. 


NASH'S History of Worcestershire (i. 251), in the account 
of the parish of Cofton Hackett, after stating that 
about the year 1637 the manor came into the possession of 
Thomas Jolliffe of the county of Stafford, through his 
marriage with an heiress, Margaret Skinner, further narrates 
that the dining parlour of the manor house, ^ a large convenient 
building,' contains a portrait of this gentleman ' with a key in 
his hand, which the tradition of the family says was given him 
by King Charles I. when in prison, that he might have access 
to him when he pleased. It is probable that this picture was 
painted when the king's affairs were quite desperate, as Mr. 
Jolliffe is represented with a melancholy, desponding counten- 
ance, his pistols and sword hanging upon a pillar before him 
as if he were saying "Hie arma cestumque repono." He 
continued faithful to his sovereign till the last and attended his 

The portrait thus described is now the property of Mr. 
Michael Biddulph of Ledbury, formerly member for Hereford- 
shire, the Cofton estate having been entailed by the will of a 
second Thomas Jolliffe, who died in 1758, on the descendants 
of his sister Anne, wife of Robert Biddulph of Ledbury ; but 
I consider myself fortunate in being the owner of an exact replica 
of Mr. Biddulph's picture, which appears to have been ordered 
by, or given to, a younger brother of the original, viz. William 
Jolliffe of Caverswall Castle, Staffordshire, who, dying in 171 1, 
left two daughters — coheiresses — Anne, wife of Philip Papillon, 
of Acrise, Kent, and Lucy, Viscountess Vane. The Papillon 
family must have inherited the picture which is now in my 
house, and the Mr. Papillon of 1760 gave it to his kinsman, 
John Jolliffe, from whom I descend, and whose letter of 
grateful thanks for the gift of the portrait of his ^ respected 
ancestor ' (in reality his grandfather) is preserved at Crowhurst 
Park, the residence of the present head of the Papillon family. 

The canvas of my picture measures 25 inches wide and 28 

high ; the face is turned three-quarters to the spectator, the 

dress is black, and a short black cape, trimmed with gold lace 



and surmounted by a white lace collar, covers the shoulders. 
The figure is visible to the waist, and the right hand is holding 
the key, of which Nash speaks. To the left of the head a 
sword and heavy silver-mounted pistol are seen hanging by 
leather straps to a hook on the wall. 

The problem of which I venture to seek the solution from 
the readers of l^he Ancestor is the meaning of the key aforesaid. 
Nash's explanation thereof, founded only on a ^ family 
tradition,' which, when he wrote his account of Cofton in 
1779, had, I fear, been dimmed by the lapse of 130 years, is 
quite inadmissible. It is not usual to allow to prisoners the 
privilege of handing the key of their gaol to friends, 
however attached, and in the case of a captive like Charles I. 
Nash's story seems absurd. Before, however, making my 
own humble suggestion as to the real significance of the key in 
question, I ought to recite in due sequence the few and meagre 
facts which I have been able to glean respecting the subject of 
these portraits. 

Thomas JoUifFe was baptized in Leek Church, Stafford- 
shire, 1 2 April, 1 6 1 7, being the eldest son of William JoUiffe 
of Leek and his wife Ann, daughter of Benedict Webb 
of Kingswood, Gloucestershire. He married in or before 
1638 Margaret Skinner, the Cofton register for that year 
recording the interment of ' a son of Mr. Thomas JoUifFe and 
Margaret his wife, buried the i day of . . . dying a 
few . . . after birth.' Other children were baptized at 
Cofton in 1639 ^^^^ 1^415 probability the squire 

was living at home when Charles L ' lay at Cofton Hall ' on 
14 May, 1645 (Nash, i. 152). As to this event Nash can 
hardly be in error, for he quotes from a circumstantial 
Journal of the Kings Army by Mr. Richard Symonds in the 
Harleian Library. King Charles was thus apparently the guest 
of Thomas JoUifFe, leaving Cofton the following day, continues 
Symonds' journal, for Himley Hall, when so far as facts are 
known to me the brief connexion between the unhappy king 
and his loyal subject ceased for ever. The loyalty of the 
master of Cofton seems to have been unquestioned, because in 
the first list of justices of the peace for Worcestershire pro- 
mulgated 10 July, 1660, only six weeks after the 'happy 
Restoration,' the name of Thomas JoUifFe appears (Nash, i.), 
whilst in 1672 and 1673 served successively as high sherifF 
for Worcestershire and Staffordshire. Moreover, in 1684 his 




eldest surviving son John married into a very loyal family, 
taking to wife Anne, eldest daughter of Thomas, second Lord 
Crewe of Steane. 

I have read the will of Thomas JollifFe, dated 13 August, 
1684, and the inscription on his monument in Cofton Church 
recording his death 23 Oct. 1693, aged 76, but no word or 
phrase in either will or epitaph afford the slightest clue to the 
history of the key ; nor is the name of Jolliffe to be found in 
any list of Charles I.'s attendants known to me. 

My only conjecture is that on the May-day in 1645, when 
Charles slept at Cofton Hall, its owner was made happy by 
some temporary permission to wait upon the king, and to 
retain the key of the sovereign's chamber. The vision of Lady 
Margaret Bellenden and the royal 'disjune' at Tillietudlem 
flits across one's memory. One room and key at Cofton 
Hall were doubtless looked on as sacred from that 14th of 
May onwards, and the cavalier squire may have determined to 
transmit to posterity the honours conferred on his house by 
being depicted holding in his hand the emblem of his king's 
trust and his own loyalty. 

I need not add that any communications with which I may 
be favoured on this subject will be very gratefully received. 


Ammerdown, Radstock. 


A WELSH MAN whose family was of any position in the 
sixteenth century can, as a rule, without much trouble find 
a pedigree thence to Adam : an Englishman who is unable to 
do the same has a natural tendency to regard all Welsh 
pedigrees with distrust, not to say contempt. At first sight it 
is undoubtedly an astounding proposition that an eighteenth 
century MS. such as The Golden Grove should be a good 
authority for eleventh and twelfth century pedigrees, yet that 
there are ^oodi prima facie reasons for such being the case I 
hope to show in the present article ; that such is the case can 
only be proved by showing that with certain exceptions Welsh 
pedigrees will stand all tests applied to them, and then 
arguing that if portions of a pedigree derived from one source 
or common set of sources be proved to be true, the remainder 
is so. 

Genealogists as a rule fail to recognize that a Welshman 
regards a pedigree from a totally different point of view to an 
Englishman. To fulfil modern requirements an English 
pedigree must be a family history in brief ; the individuals 
named in it must ' live,' the important dates in their lives must 
be mentioned, and all facts known about them must be 
recorded. It is not so and has never been so with a Welsh 
pedigree ; a Welshman is satisfied with the mere names of his 
ancestors, and would rather know his female descents than his 
collateral relations. At the present time tradition in Wales 
is very highly esteemed,^ and ordinary individuals are content 
with the traditional pedigrees, the result being that as a rule 
the Welsh genealogist is content to compare the various 
traditional pedigrees and to endeavour to reconcile conflicting 
statements, so that little has been done to test these pedigrees 
on modern lines. 

After some experience in dealing with the ordinary 
collections of Welsh pedigrees, I have come to the conclusion 
that such mistakes as occur in them, apart from those 

^ I recently investigated a traditional relationship between two existing 
families, and found the common ancestor had died more than 300 years ago. 




incidental to frequent copying and compilation, are due to one 
or other of the following causes, which I will state in the 
form of axioms : — 

I. Generations are frequently omitted. 

II. An individual occasionally is affiliated to his wife's 
parents, or to one of his wife's parents or one of his own. 

III. An individual is sometimes affiliated to a step-parent, 
but only in cases where such step-parent has had issue by the 
real parent. 

IV. Little attention is paid to the Christian names of 

V. Previously to 1560 or thereabouts the dates assigned 
to and facts stated about individuals are not contemporary 
with the pedigrees, but late and generally quite untrust- 
worthy additions. 

VI. Legitimacy must be considered in regard to the 
Welsh law on the subject, which differs from the English. 

It will be convenient to consider a concrete instance, and I 
will select the earlier part of the Geraldine pedigree from T-he 
Golden Grove y 1. 1783, etc. 

This pedigree is not strictly speaking a Welsh one, and it 
must be borne in mind that the arguments hereafter adduced 
in favour of the genuineness of Welsh pedigrees only apply to 
the descendants of Gerald de Windsor and Nest daughter of 
Rees ap Tewdur ; the remainder of the pedigree must be taken 
as representing a tradition, probably a very early one. I have 
selected this example chiefly in order to have the advantage of 
comparing it with the results of recent research, as appearing 
in The Ancestor^ by Mr. Round ; he gives the same pedigree 
thus : — 



< I bo "O 

W -t3 -a r< E3 

^ ^ ^ ^ 

f^H u W W § 

.•2 - ^ ^ 

• - o »- S 

\J CO cn *J t/) 









bo C 



1 de 







;-c CO 

« u „ • 

t> -o ys 

".23 « « 

2 o 



It will be seen at once that the two pedigrees agree in 
many points, in particular with regard to the father and 
grandfather of Gerald de Windsor ; and bearing in mind that 
the one is really a pedigree of the Irish branch, the other of 
the Welsh, the discrepancies are not more than might be 
expected. I will venture, however rashly and with all the 
deference due to Mr. Round, to make a few criticisms on his 
pedigree, feeling sure that so keen a critic and ardent searcher 
after truth must be conscious of its weakness at certain points. 
After careful study of Mr. Round's second article the only 
evidence I can find given by him for the paternity of Gerald 
de Windsor^ is that Giraldus Cambrensis^ 'styles him on one 
occasion Geraldus de Windesora.' Surely this by itself would 
hardly be sufficient even for the most careless herald, whose 
laxity our author has so often justly exposed. But when 
backed up as it is by the pedigree in the Harleian Roll and 
that in The Golden Grove^ the connection would seem to be 
sufficiently shown. This being the case, the argument that 
Gerald had a brother Maurice,^ because Maurice de Windsor 
is more frequently mentioned than Gerald de Windsor, must 
fall to the ground, since it is based on insufficient premises. 
The case for Reinald is little better. They would both 
appear to belong to the family, but their true place in the 
pedigree is, in my opinion at all events, not at present 
ascertained. That there were two marriages between the 
Hastings and Windsor families does not appear in the 
Hastings pedigree given by Mr. Round * owing to an 
unfortunate misprint ; it should read Robert de Hastings 
married the daughter and heir of William de Windsor. And 
here Mr. Round seems for once to have fallen into a trap, the 
like of which fortunately for genealogists is rarely set. The 
facts are these: In Domesday we find under Essex — 'Terra 
Witti de Warenna. Hundred de Dommauua. Estanes 
tenuit Duua liva femina, etc.'^ 'Terra Galteri diaconi. 
Hund de Witbrictesherna. %Eistanes ten & Gait in dnio qd 
tenuit Dodinc, etc.'^ 'Robert de Windsor obtained Estanes 
in the days of Henry I.^ William son of Robert obtained a 

^ P- 95- 

2 It must be noted that he was not the Gerald, Lord of Ophaley, of the 
pedigree, but a son of William de Barri. 
^ p. 92. 

* The Ancestor, '^o. 2, p. 91. ® f. 36. ^ f. 363. 

Zuria Lopez y« ft 
Lord of Biscay 


Manso Lopez, Lord ol 

Inigo left-hand 

Lopez D 

Gerald Dias Lopez, being expelled Bisc; 
bastard brother Inigo, dwelt in Florenc 

Osorio, born in 

Othero went into Normandy = 

Walter Fitz Other car 
to England and was h 

William de Windsor, 
Lord of Stanwel, 
ancestor to y® Lord 

Robert de Windsor,; 
Lord of Assen Parva 

Gerald de 
he was ste\i 
Murkart's dsi 
Dyvet given 

William, etc. 

William — Angh. f. GrifF 


ap Rees, prince 
of S. Wales 

Momea, rather 

of Fain 

f. h. r= Robert de 

Odo de=: 


Raymundus Crassus == Basil sister to Richard 

or le Gross 

Strongbow, Earl of Pembroke 

— I 





Adam or Abraham = Isabel f. Phillip 
le Grace I Martin 



of Ar 

f. Sanceo Estegnis 
nes, Lord of Tavira 

de Medici 


Sorio fled to = Christina f. Conan ap. loga, Prince 
Scotland of Wales (as I. ffr. van Bo.) sed q. 

(! de la Cerda of 
)!;-oyal of Castile 

Gerald went into Normandy = f. Harlewin de Cantville 

(as Jn. flfr. B.) j or Comitis Villa, Lord of Williers 

( ?ror = 

I Pembroke in 2^ year of Henry the first, =Nesta or Vesta f. Rees ap Tewdwr 

1 de Montgomery, and went to Ireland for 
^ of King Henry y^ 3^ he had the Rule of 

■ lies = Ralph de 

king of South Wales 

Maurice Fitzgerald went to Ireland with bro.: 
Robert Fitz Stephen and their nephews 
Robert, Mayler and Raymond to aid Dermott 
son to Murchart 14th of Hen. z'^- 

Giraldus Alexander 

David Bishop 
of St. David's 
ob. 23 Hen. 2 


Maurice (some 
say William) 


Alice sister to Richard 
Strongbow, Earl of Pembroke 

Sylvester, Bishop 
of St. David's 

Osburn Fitzgerald com-: 
monly called Osburn 
Wydhyl, came over to 
y^ aid of his uncle Griffith 
ap Rees ap Tewdwr 

* A line has been drawn through this, probably by Theophilus Jones. 

[Between pages 50, 51 


fresh confirmation of it from Henry 11/^ Robert de Hastings 
held Eistanes at the time of the Liber Niger, his son WiUiam 
also holding there ; and it has been shown by Mr. Clark that 
this Robert de Hastings was a son of Walter the Deacon.^ 
So that we have two contemporary Williams, sons of two 
Roberts, sons of two Walters, both Domesday tenants, holding 
two manors of practically the same name in the same county. 
What could seem more reasonable than to identify the two 
men and the two places as Mr. Round has done, though Mr. 
Clark has not ? ^ Yet the daughter and heiress of the one 
William married the son and heir of the other, and the places 
are far apart. ' One could not desire a better illustration of" 
the mischief in county history that may follow from identifying 
wrongly a single Domesday manor.' 

Turning to The Golden Grove pedigree it is evidently 
not derived from the same source as O'Daly's History of 
the Geraldines^ or 'The Earls of Kildare^ and is not based on 
Geraldius' history ; this is accordingly available for comparison, 
the results of which seem worth noting. The place of 
Giraldus Cambrensis in the pedigree is wrong ; his mother has 
been omitted (note Axiom I. ante), and it seems probable in view 
of the Harleian Roll pedigree that Alexander is also placed a 
generation too high. (Incidentally I may mention that Gladys 
daughter of Rhiwallon ap Cynfyn, who is stated in Burke's 
Peerage to have been Gerald the steward's mother, was his 
wife's mother. Axiom II.) As Nest had children by four (?) 
husbands, Gerald the Steward, King Henry, Stephen the 
Constable and Owen ap Cadwgan, it is difficult to decide 
(Axioms III. and VI.) whether the individuals alluded to by 
Giraldus as his relations were descendants of Gerald the 
Steward or not, but of the individuals occurring in The Golden 
Grove pedigree (exclusive of those noticed by Mr. Round) 
Giraldus names his ' consobrinos ' Odo de Kerreu,^ who married 
a daughter of Ricardus filius Tancardi and Reimund, 'tam 
Stephanidae quam Mauricii ex fratre primaevo nepos . . . 
vir amplae quantitatis staturaeque paulo plus quam mediocris 
. . . who married Basilia sister to Earl Richard,' evidently 

^ The Jncestor, No. 2, p. 92, 2 jj-ch. Journal, xxvi. 123-4, etc. 

^ S&Q, Jrch. Journal, xxv'i. 122, 130. 
* The Ancestor, No. i, p. 119. ^ j^q. 

® He witnesses the charter of Peter, Bishop of St. Davids {The Ancestor, 
No. 2, p. 94). 



Raymond Crassus or le Gros. We also read of another Gerald, 
' frater Odonis primaevus,' who was killed by the men of Ros, 
probably one of the two sons of William who are stated in the 
Harleian Roll pedigree to have died s.p. ^ William son of 
Gerald and his brothers are mentioned in the Brut in 1146 in 
conjunction with Cadell son of Griffith (i.e. Griffith ap Rhys 
ap Tewdwr), and his brothers Maredudd and Rhys — brothers- 
in-law of William if his wife is correctly given in the 

1 have taken my example of a pedigree from l^be Golden 
Grove, This is the latest and most accessible of the general 
collections of Welsh pedigrees ; it appears to have been com- 
piled in the years 1752-65 and contains some later additions, 
chiefly in the handwriting of Theophilus Jones, who used it 
for his History of Breconsbire^ published in 1805, and states in 
eflFect that it is the book of the Arwydd-feirdd (chief bard), 
taken by command of the Earl of Carberry.^ Mr. Pym 
Yeatman names Evan Evans as the compiler.^ It is certainly 
not by Hugh Thomas, as stated by Mr. Horwood,* for he 
died in 1720, but it is possible that some of his MSS. are 
now bound up with it. On going through the pedigrees it 
will be seen that certain dates in the seventeenth century con- 
stantly occur ; in the case of Breconshire these are 1 644 and 
1686, the dates at which the collections of pedigrees of 
Richard Williams of Llywel, sometimes known as Dick 
Howell William, and David Edwards of Rhydygors are 
known to have been made, so that it would seem that 
the immediate source of The Golden Grove was, as regards 
Breconshire, the works of these two genealogists. A similar 
state of affairs is found in regard to the other counties, the 
conclusion being that ^e Golden Grove is a copy and continua- 
tion of pedigrees drawn up in the seventeenth century. Going 
further back references will be found to various other pedigree 
writers under their initials (a list of thirty has been inserted 
by Jones at the beginning of the first volume), so that it 
would appear that the book in its present form contains a 

1 The entry is * Willimus fillius Giraldi de Penbrook (his father is styled 
Giraldus de Windsor Castelanus de Penbrook) genuit duos fiUios sine sobole 

2 Vol. ii. 140, and cp. p. 139 with The Golden Grove, G. 1030. 
^ Notes and Queries, ser. 9, v. 359. 

* znd Rep. Hist. MSS. Comm. app. p. 3 1 . 


continuous series of additions made to existing pedigrees, each 
addition being within the reasonable knowledge of its author, 
and is not a collection of pedigrees made at a late date and 
therefore of little value. This is of course a deduction from 
the internal evidence — the external evidence will appear later. 

Mr. Vaughan, writing from the Welsh point of view in 
an interesting article in T Cymmrodor (vol. ix.), shows that the 
various pedigrees of the royal line in their earliest part are 
inconsistent, but concludes that ' they are not entire fictions 
but are founded on truth though overlaid with much that is 
false.' He divides the existing collections of pedigrees into 
three classes — 

I. Those compiled before Henry VII. 
~ II. Collections compiled temp. Henry VII. 

III. Collections compiled subsequently to the last men- 
tioned date. 

The earliest collection of pedigrees I have come across are 
those appended to the oldest known Welsh annals, the Annales 
Cambriae, in Harleian MS. No. 3859. They are discussed at 
length by Mr. Egerton Phillimore,^ who concludes that in their 
present form they were composed in the last half of the tenth 
century, the date of the MS. being upwards of a century later, 
and ' that up to the date when all Welsh records necessarily 
became more or less fabulous, these genealogies have every 
claim to rank beside the Annales and the Saxon Genealogies 
as a valuable historical authority. The late Mr. G. T. Clark 
and Mr. Alewyn Evans have left collections of pedigrees 
brought down to the present time, and the work is still being 
carried on in Wales. 

Welsh pedigrees are to be found in two forms, and as one 
of them is, so far as I am aware, peculiar to Welsh genealogy,, 
I give an instance of the pedigree of Pryse of Gogerddan in 
each form, taken from the printed edition of Lewys Dwnn 
(i. 44 ; ii. 23). The earlier collections are as a rule in the 
second form or a modified version of it. 

r Cymmroiior, ix. 141. 



Mawd V. Syr=: Rydderch ap Jeuan = Angharad v. Gruffydd gryg 

William Clement 
o Llawdden 

Lloyd, esq., o Park 
Rydderch yn Glyn 

ap Jevan vachan Ar 

Ffylip — 

Jeuan — 

David — 


Rydderch — 


Thomas = 


Sion — 

Morgan = 
o Wastad 

David Lloyd 

Davydd o Lyn Aeron = Elen v. Owen ap Richiart 

o Lystan 

Davydd Lloyd z= . . . merch a koeres Mredydd 
Ar I ap Llewelyn Esgwier o Lowdden 

Rys ap Davydd = Katrin v. Rys ap Davydd Lloyd 
Lloyd Aro Gog- I Esgwier ap Davydd ap Einion o 
erddan | Lystan 

Richart ap Rys = EUiw v. a choaeres William ap 
Ar Siankin ap lerwerth ap Einion 

Esgwier o Desmond 

John Prys Esgwier = Elsbeth v. Thomas =Brichiett 2. 

Gogerddan ag 
o'r kyngor o'r 


Perot, esq., ap Syr 
Owain Perot Meiles 
o Mari v. ag aeres 
Jams Barkley vab 
Arglwydd Barkley 







6 daughters 
whose names 
and marriages 
are given 

Elsbeth 4. Elsbeth 
V. a 1597 

I. Syr Richiart Prys = Gwenn Prys sol aeres 

knt. (living 1588) 
Dustus o Pies ac 
Kwrwm (living 

1597) . I. 


Tom as ap Rys ap Morus 
Esgwier ap Owen ap ap 
Jeuan Blene Esgwier 

2. Tomas Prys = Brichied v. ag aeres 
1588 Johi^ 3p Gruffydd ap 

Jeuan ap Siankyn 

John Prys 




Brichiett 1591 
gwraig Syr 

John Lewys 

kt. 1613 

Elsbeth 1588 Mari 1588 Ledys 

gwraig Rolant gwraig margcd 

Price 1597 Edward Katrin 


Then follow the children and marriages of William Lloyd 
ap Rishiart ap Rys and David Lloyd ap Richart ap Rys in 
narrative form, the arms of Richiart Prys Sgwier (a coat of 
six quarters impaling another coat with the same number of 
quarters), and the date 29 December, 1588; and the whole 
ends — 

Receved off Rich^ Pryse 
By me booke 

Thomas Jones of fFowntaen gat. 


Tad Ric^ ab Pric o Sir Abertiwy. Sion ap Ric^ ab R" Dd lloid ab 
D'^ ab Rudd^ ab Jeun. lloid ab Jeun. Gr^ voel ab Gr'' ab Yeroth ab Kadifor 
ab Gwaith. 

Mam Richard ab R^ oedd Kattrin v'' Rs. Dd lloid ab D"^ ab Eiginon ap 
Holl ab Tydir ab Einon vychan ab Einon ab Mirig ab Jeun. ab Gronw ab 
Ivor ab Idnerth ap Kydogan ab Elistan Glodrydd. 

Mam R^ oedd Owein ab Richard ab Gr^ ap Linn ab Mdd*^ bengoch 
ap Linn, ab Hoell ab Seissyllt ap Linn, ab Kodogan ab Elistan Glodrydd. 

Mam Kattrin R^ ab D"^ oedd Varged verch Jeun. ab Owein ab Mdd'' ab 
D** vachan ab Gr^ ab Einion ab Ednyfed ab Sulien ab Kyradog ab Gollwyn. 

Mam Varged v'^ Jeun. ab Owein oedd Oleybryd Mdd*^ ab Jeun. ab Linn, 
ab Tydir ab Gronwy ab Eignion ab Seysyllt ab Ednyowein synydd ab Brochwel 
ab Walder ab Ydris arw ab Klydno ab Ynir varfdruch ab Gwyddno garnir. 

Mam Oleibryd Mdd^ oedd Vallt Rhys gethin o byellt ab Owein ab 
Ric* ab Gr^ ab Linn, ab Mdd"" bengoch ab Linn, ab Hoell ab Seisyllt at Linn, 
ab Kydogan ab Elistan Glodrydd. 

Mam Owein ab Mdd'^ ab oedd Llyky Jeun. ab Kydogan weithwas 
ab Gr*^ ab Gr^ ab Beli ab Selif ab Brochwel ab Aeddan ab Kyngen ab Elisse 
ab Gwylawg ab Beli ab Mael myngein ab Selyf varf. Kadav ab Kynan gar- 
rwyn ab Brochwel Ysgethrog. 

Mam Llyky Jeun. ab Dodogan oedd Wenhwyfar v'' RyfFry ab Alo ab 
Rywallon vichan ab Rywallon llwyd ab Ithel ab R^ ab Ivor ab Hoell ab 
Morgan vichan o Evas ab Morgan ab Jestyn ab Gwrgan twysog Morganwg. 

Mam RifFri ab Alo oedd v^ Eynon ab Destaen ab loreth ab Gurgenv ab 
Yeroth vchdryd ab Edwin vrenin. 

Mam R^ lloid ab ab Eignion oedd Wenllyan v*^ Owein arglwydd y 

Mam Lloid ab D*^ ab Eignion oedd Wladys v^ Mdd'' ab Gwin. ab 
Madog lloyd ab Linn, ab Meilyr gryg ab Gr'^ ab Yeroth ab Owein ab Rodri 
ab Hoell ab Enathan ab Brochwel ab Aeddna ab Kyngen ab Elisse ab 

Mam R« lloid ab ab Rudd'^ oedd v^ Owein ab Rickard ab Gr'^ ab 
Linn, ab Mdd^ bengoch ab Linn, ab Hoel ab Seissyllt. 

Mam Lloyd ab ab Rudd^ oedd Varged v^ Griffith Jeun. vichan ab 
Jeun. ab R^ ab Llawdden. 

Mam Jeun. Gr^ voel oedd Ethlyw v^ Mdd'^ ab Kydogan vantach ab 
Kydogan ab Linn, ab Gr ab Mdd^ ab Edelfrich ab Predyr ab Peisroyn ab 
Einion envydd ab Pyll ab Sandde ab Gwyddno Garanhir. 



Mam Rudd^ ab Jeun. Lloid oedd Yngharad Rickard ab Eynon ab 
Kynfrig ab Morgan ab Phe. ab Seisyllt ab Linn, ab Kydogan ab Elistan 

Mam Ellilyw Mdd^ ab Kydogan vantach oedd Wenllian Mdd^ ab 
Owein ab yr arglwydd R^ Gr. ab R^ ab Tewdwr. 

Mam D"^ ab Rudd*" oedd Varied v'" GrufF^ ab Jeun. ychan ab Jeun. ab 
R^ ab Llawdden. 

Mam John ab Richard ap R^ oedd Ethlyw Glim, ab Jenkin ab Yeroth ab 
Eiginon ab Gr*^ ab Linn, ab Kynfrig ab Osbuan ab Wyddeb ab Gwydd laces. 

Mam Glim, ab Jenkin ab Yeroth oedd Wenllyan v*^ Kynfrig ab Ropert ab 
Yeroth ab Ryryd ab Yeroth ab Madog ab Ednywiein. 

Mam Wenllyan oedd Yngharad v** GruP vichan ab Gruf^ ab D'^ goch ab 

ab Gr^ ab Linn, ab leroth drwyndwn ab Owein Gwynedd. 

Mam Ethlyw v'^ Glim oedd Lawry v^— ab R' ab ab Hoell ab Gr^ ab 
Owein ab Bleddyn ab Owen Brogyntn. 

Mam Lowri oedd Varged Rowland ab Gr^ goch ab Madog ab Mirig ab 

ab Llwarch ab Jeun. gann ab Kynddelw ab R^ ab Edryd ab Methan ab 
lasseth ab Korwed ab Marchaidd. 

Mam Varged oedd Lawri Tydyr ab Gr. vichan ab Madog gripl ab Gr. 
varwn gwin ab Gr^ arglwydd Dinas Bran ab Madog ab Gr. Maylor ab Madog 
ab Mdd^ ab Bleiddyn ab Kynfyn arglwydd Powys a larll Caerlleon. 

Sion ab Styfyn ab Jeun. gwin ab Siames ab R^ ab ab Howel ab Vain 
ab Linn ab Hoell ab Madog ab Trahayarn ab Gr^ goch ab Gr^ voel ab 
Gronwy ab Gwirgene ab Kydogan ab Elystan Glodrydd.-'- 

For the benefit of English readers I will add a translation 
of the beginning of the second version and show the whole of 
it in pedigree form. The words in brackets are omitted by 
Lewis Dwnn : — 

The father of Sr. Richard Pryse of co. Cardigan was John son of Richard 
son of Rees [son of] David Lloyd son of David son of Rhydderch son of 
Jevan Lloid son of Jevan [son of] Griffith voel son of Griffith son of lorwerth 
son of Kadivor son of Gwaithvoed. 

The mother of Richard son of Rees was Katherine daughter of Rees [son 
of] David Lloyd son of David son of Einon son of Howell son of Tudor son 
of Einon vychan son of Einon son of Merick son of Jevan son of Gronow son 
of Ivor son of Idnerth son of Cadogan son of Elistan Glodrydd. [The rest of 
this genealogy will be made clear by the great chart pedigree of Pryse, which 
accompanies this article.] 

It is more convenient to consider the actual pedigrees as 
apart from the collections of pedigrees in different divisions to 
those given by Mr. Vaughan — 

I. From the earliest times to circa a.d. 942. 
11. From that period to a.d. 1536. 
III. From that period to the present time. 

1 This last has no connection with what goes before, but is the paternal 
descent of John Price of Pilleth, co. Radnor {Lezvys Dwnn, i. 252). 










voel =i:Ethlyw 





















The Lord 







I , 

Jevan | 
Lloyd =:Angharad 





















Rhydderch= Margaret 


David = Margaret 


Lloyd = 


























. I 


. I 





























Madoc Lloyd | 





Meredith =: 





I ^ 

Owen Lord j 
of Towyn Owein 

I . i 

David Lloyd=Wenllian Tevan=:Gok 

I I 

I — I 

Rees ^Margaret 


Rees = Katherine 

H r- 

Richard = Ethlyw 




Sr Richard 


in.ce of 


chan of 





lo =... 















Idris arw 







. I 








Meredith= Mailt 















. I 




Rees gethin 
of Builth 





! . 










1 . 









David goch 








Jenkin =:Wenllian 












Jevan gam 







Jevan gam 








Ro wland = L 0 wry 

Cynfyn Lord 
of Powys 
and Earl of 








Lord of 
Dinas Bran 


varwn gwin 








: Margaret 


GuiMim=: L o w r y 

[fie^wmz pages 56, 57 


The second division covers the period from the passing of 
the laws of Howell Dda to the year in which the laws of Wales 
were made identical with those of England by the Statute of 27 
Henry VIII. c. 26, entitled ' An Act for Laws and Justice to be 
ministered in Wales in like form as it is in this realm,' which 
enacted — 

That all persons inheritable to lands which shall descend after the Feast of 
All Saints next coming within the Principality of Wales shall forever after the 
said Feast inherit and be inheritable to the same lands after the English tenure 
without division or partition and after the form of the Laws of this Realm ot 
England, and not after the form of the Laws of this Realm of England and 
not after any (Welsh) tenure nor after the form of any Welsh Laws or Customs : 
And that the Laws, Ordinances and Statutes of this Realm of England forever 
and none other Laws, Ordinances, or Statutes from and after the said Feast 
shall be had, used, practised and executed in the said Dominion of Wales. 

This statute contained the proviso — 

That lands in Wales which have been used time out of mind by the laud- 
able customs of the said Country to be departed and departable among issues 
and heirs male shall still so continue and be used, in like form, fashion and 
condition as if this Act had never been had nor made. 

And towards the close of the sixteenth century we find 
actions for land based on the claim that it was held by Welsh 
tenure and therefore descended equally to all the male chil- 

Of the pedigrees earlier than a.d. 942 I do not propose to 
treat. It is possible that the arguments advanced with respect 
to the later ones are applicable to them at all events for some 
time previous to this date, since the laws of Howell Dda are 
known to have been founded on those of Dyfnwal Moelmud, 
who probably flourished about 400 a.d., though there was 
another chieftain of the same name who is said to have lived 
about 800 years earlier, but whether the provisions in Howell's 
laws as to the kindred are taken from the earlier laws must be 
considered an open question. 

I have already shortly noticed the later pedigrees, and need 
only now say that with the exception of parish registers there 
are plenty of Welsh records in existence by which a pedigree 
may be proved. As a matter of fact I consider it considerably 
easier to trace a Welsh pedigree than an English one. 

The basis of Welsh pedigrees I believe to be the Welsh 
laws, and the basis of the Welsh laws may be said to be the 
kindred. We find three groups of kindred — -those within the 



fourth degree ; those within the seventh degree and those with- 
in the ninth degree ; there is however some confusion as to how 
these degrees are reckoned, and it would seem that the above 
description of the groups is not strictly accurate. As to the 
first group however there is no doubt, it consists of the 
descendants of a common great grandparent ; as to the other 
groups the difficulty is shortly whether ' degree ' means inter- 
mediate degree, or degree in an ascending line, e.g. whether 
David Lloyd, 1 613, in the above pedigree of Pryse, is related to 
Sir Richard Pryse in the thirteenth or seventh degree. For my 
present purpose it is unnecessary to go into the question. I will 
adopt Professor Rhys' 'conjecture'^ (though I consider that 
his argument is convincing, and that the objections to it will 
probably disappear on more accurate study of the laws), that 
degree means intermediate degree, so that David Lloyd would 
be related to Sir Richard Pryse in the thirteenth degree, as 
should this view be incorrect my present argument would be 

We have to consider the kindred from two points of view : 

L The relations of the individuals composing it intef se. 
IL Their relations to those outside the kindred. 

L Here we are only concerned with the first group of 
kindred, the descendants of a common great-grandfather, 
and principally with regard to land tenure. The provisions of 
the laws as to this shortly were as follows : On the death of 
an original holder his sons divided his lands equally between 
them, but the family holding was not broken up, because the 
division was not final. The sons of the brothers did not claim 
per stirpes. They were first cousins and had the right to claim 
an equality of shares per capita ; but still the family holding 
was not broken up : another division is provided for, to take 
place, presumably, when all the grandchildren are dead. Then 
the great-grandchildren or second cousins finally divide equally 
between them ; after this third division each of the great-grand- 
children is regarded as an original holder. ^ 

The group of kindred to the fourth degree was also re- 
sponsible for the marriage of daughters, who were entided to 
a marriage portion and to be married to a free tribesman so 

^ Celtic Folk-lore^ p. 421. 

2 This is practically quoted from Mr, Seebohm's Tribal System in Wales^ 
I have also made great use of Rhys and Jones' History of the Welsh People. 


that their sons might have full tribal rights ^ — in this case the 
group is extended to the descendants (possibly only the male 
descendants) of the eight great-grandparents. 

We are therefore led to conclude that official pedigrees, 
must have been kept, as it would be practically impossible for 
a man to know all his second cousins accurately. 

II. This conclusion becomes almost irresistible when we 
consider the relations of the kindred to outsiders. Here the 
group of second cousins, apparently all the descendants of the 
eight great-grandparents, were jointly responsible for ' saraad," 
i.e. the payment for insult or injury short of homicide ; the 
group of third cousins (accepting Professor Rhys' conjecture 
above mentioned, otherwise fifth cousins), descendants of the 
sixteen great-great-grandparents through females as well as 
males are responsible for galanas — payment for homicide. 
Should there be a deficiency in this, ' the spear penny ' was to 
be gathered from the sixth (or ninth) cousins, though these are 
regarded as outside the kindred and there is a special provision 
for its collection. 

The murderer is to take a servant of the Lord, carrying with him a relic^ 
and wherever he shall meet with a person beyond the seventh degree of kin- 
dred, let such person take his oath that he is not descended from any of the 
four kindreds from which the other is descended and unless he take that oath,, 
let him pay a spear penny, and if he take the oath he is to be exempted. 

Supposing these pedigrees to have been kept, the question 
arises. Who kept them ? The answer is clearly given in the 
following extracts from the so-called ' anomalous laws,' which 
are not of the same importance as the ' codes,' from which 
what goes before has been taken, but still of an early date and 
considerable authority : — 

Three branches of the Art of Bardism. First, the primitive bard, or a 
bard licensed by privilege, having his degree and his privilege, by discipleship, 
from an authorized teacher who is a presiding bard ; and upon him depends 
. . . every memorial and record of country and kindred, in respect to marriages 
and kins and arms and territorial divisions, and the privileges of the country 
and kindred of the Cymry. ^ 

^ It would seem that the residence in Wales of a foreigner and his 
descendants till the ninth generation conferred these rights, and that inter- 
marriages with the daughters of full tribesmen generation after generation 
made the descendants of a foreigner tribesmen in the fourth generation. 

2 Ancient Laws and Institutions of Wales (ed. 1841), p. 511. 



There are three branches of literature : . . . thirdly, one who is informed 
in book and letter . . . and in preserving a literary record in respect to the 
three records of the bards of the isle of Britain ; and these are, the genealogy 
of descent by marriages, territorial divisions, and praiseworthy actions and 
sciences. ^ 

There are three errors of law : an uncertain claim ; an imperfect answer ; 
and an unsupported record. 

There are three means of relief from the three errors : keeping and main- 
taining a systematic record of kin and descent by legitimate marriages ... it 
was on account of the uncertainty- of claims that it has been regulated and 
established for bards, qualified by the privilege and degree of session, specially 
to have the custody of kin and descent. ^ 

There are three functions pertaining to the teachers of the country and 
kindred as being clergymen : . . . second, keeping authentic record of 
privileges and customs and tribestocks, and genealogy of descents, with legiti- 
mate marriages and of honourable actions, and of all excellencies of a country 
and kindred. ^ 

There are three records of a kindred : the record of a court of law ; the 
record of a chief of kindred conjointly with his seven elders ; and the record of 
bardism : the record of a court of law depends upon the judges ; the record of a 
chief of kindred depends upon his seven elders, to wit the privileges and events 
of their kindred, and the seven elders are to transfer it to the chief of kindred 
who succeeds the one who may die ; and the record of bardism depends upon 
bards authorized as teachers, and by the privilege of session. These three 
records are called the three authenticated records of country and kindred ; and 
upon them depends the authenticating of every degree of descent, and every 
privilege of arms ; for from the privilege of land originates the privilege of arms ; 
and when the privilege of arms shall be found authenticated by record and 
symbol, that becomes a testimony in every suit as to land and soil. * 

To sum up very briefly : the ancient laws of Wales 
practically necessitated the keeping of official records of pedi- 
grees ; the bards were entrusted with the keeping of them ; 
we have a continuous series of collections of pedigrees dating 
from very early times. Is it likely that with authentic material 
at hand, the later pedigrees should be inventions ? 

'Therfore (to quote an old writer) let such disdainefull 
heads, as scant knowe their owne Grandfathers, leave their 
scoffing and tawnting of Welshmen, for that thing that all 
other nations in the world doo glorie in ; and let them read 
the ancient writer Berosus . . . and if they beleeve him, let 
them not denie our origin ; and if they credit not him, let 
them beleeve no more but what they see with their eies, or 
what pleaseth their fond fantasies/ 

H. J. T. WOOD. 

^ Ancient Laws and Institutions oj Wales (ed. 1841), p. 513. 
2 Ibid. p. 521. ^ Ibid. p. 547. * Ibid. p. 559. 




* Oblivion the cancard enemie to fame and renoune, the suckyng serpent to 
auncient memorie.' — Hairs Chronicle. 

THE genealogical tree, like the aloe, bursts into full flower 
only after long intervals. Two such flowering periods in 
England were the Elizabethan and the early Victorian ages. 
The Elizabethan heralds, at home in their new house, with a 
charter of incorporation and other braveries, found themselves 
attendant upon a new nobility, and heard a new gentry knock- 
ing at their doors. The wars of the Roses had been a very 
murrain amongst the ancient earls and barons of the land, who 
were all but exterminated by axe and sword and forfeiture. 
The creatures of the house of Tudor sat in the high places of 
the house of lords, and the country manor houses were filled 
with men of new names made rich by the new woollen trade 
or by lawyers who fattened upon the extravagances of Tudor 

With such a market for their wares the heralds and pedigree 
makers fell joyfully to work. For the new gentleman were 
found arms and crest, which hinted at near kinship to the most 
illustrious bearer of his name or of a name in anyway resembling 
it, whilst for the new lord were traced out and emblazoned in 
gold and many colours those marvellous pedigree rolls which 
are our wonder to-day when we see them brought out of their 
leather cases and pulled out along the hall floor or the hall table. 
Over the shields at the head sit the ancient kings of the earth 
from whose loins derives the Elizabethan lord whose name and 
style thirty feet below are engrossed above his great shield of 
many quarters. If we turn the pages of a peerage of to-day 
we find it still fragrant with the family legends and ancestral 
chronicles which flowed so easily from Elizabethan quills. 

After the Elizabethan age, genealogy has its period of re- 
pose. Now and again an artist arises to find ancestral legend 
for the house of some new peer. The story of the Feilding 
descent from the house of Habsburg is one which a Cooke or 



Dethick might have been proud to father, and the great duke's 
Churchill pedigree is a seemly fiction. But for the most part 
the Elizabethan legends are copied and re-copied, mumbled 
and mis-quoted, until the coming of the great Victorian period. 

A great romancer had then filled the minds of the English 
with dreams of crumbling castle and haunted abbey, of tour- 
neys and jousts, of errant knights and moss troopers until our 
people became mad with the madness of La Mancha. Armour 
which had cankered in wood-sheds and back-kitchens was 
brought forth and scoured, helmets which had for generations 
held the shepherd's tar and raddle and the groom's liniments 
were rescued from their vile offices and honourably cleansed 
by their happy finders. Ancient furniture was sought out, 
and books printed in the black letter, whilst the curiosity- 
monger's back-room became a workshop of Gothic oddments 
conceived and fashioned after a style which makes the epithet 
of forgery too harsh a word to use concerning such innocent 

In the north country many a cattle-grazing bonnet-laird was 
sought out upon his hillside to be greeted as high chief of his 
clan, and to be persuaded to quit his comfortable breeches 
for plaid petticoats whose colour and pattern were vouched to 
him by Edinburgh tradesmen as those belonging to his name 
and blood. Further to the south infatuated gentlemen gathered 
in Drury Lane armour, and for three rainy August days 
solemnly pushed at each other with painted lances. 

Such was the time of the renaissance of family legend. 
The old English landed gentry, dissatisfied with the neady 
engrossed succession of John to Robert and of Richard to 
John, which was all that their pedigrees would afford them, 
sought impatiendy for ancestral tales which should plump out 
these wizened facts, and ancestral tales were soon forthcoming 
in great plenty. Beside the landed gentry, and amongst 
them, a new class had arisen. Bankers, ironmasters and 
manufacturers had prospered in the fat years which followed 
Waterloo, and these were not slow to demand a wedding gar- 
ment of pedigree woven with legend. Above others this 
class was the natural prey of the pedigree maker, and amongst 
this class Mr. John Ross Coulthart stands for a tall obelisk 
of warning example. 

The facts of Mr. Coulthart's biography are simple and 
massive. The Banker's Magazine for January 1858 published 


his portrait and with it an abridgement of his life and achieve- 
ments. He had been a schoolboy at Buittle in the stewartry of 
Kirkcudbright, and left school to become clerk to a banker and 
attorney at Castle Douglas. In 1834 we find him a principal 
clerk at a branch bank in Halifax, and from 1836 he was 
manager of the Ashton, Staleybridge, Hyde and Glossop Bank 
at Ashton-under-Lyne. In 1855 he was looking upon his 
lesser townsmen from the mayoral chair of Ashton-under- 
Lyne. There was a baker in the Hunting of the Snark who 
only baked bridecake. With the bridecake of such a specialist 
we might fairly compare the rich style of the writer to whom 
we owe this sketch of a career, a writer, doubtless, who wrote 
no biographies but those of bankers. In a sentence we are 
given our man : 'Though in some respects Mr. Coulthart 
may be said to be engaged in an arduous and exacting profes- 
sion, yet he has not neglected to cultivate general literature, 
nor to employ his time in the acquisition of information which 
has been deemed useful by his fellow townsmen and the public' 
In fact, the muse of literature jogged Mr. Coulthart's elbow 
until he consented to publish, in 1838, an octavo volume of 
Decimal Interest Tables. 

Needless to add that the intellectual brow, the upturned 
collars, the flashing eye, the large black silk bow and respect- 
able whiskers of the accompanying portrait from a steel plate 
do nothing to injure the impression which a reader would 
derive from the biography of Mr. Coulthart. 

But biography and portrait help us nothing in our search 
for the most important events in Mr. Coulthart's moving story, 
events which will keep the name of Coulthart green, when the 
glowing periods of his Decimal Interest Tables sleep in the library 
of forgotten books. We say that these events were his meeting 
with Mr. Alexander Cheyne and with Mr. Geo. Parker Knowles. 

At some unknown date in the forties Mr. Coulthart met 
with Alexander Cheyne, esquire, a barrister-at-law, and bachelor 
of arts of Trinity College. Little is known of Mr. Cheyne. 
He was admitted to Grays Inn in 1833. He was the author of 
a work on the familiar subject of Justice to Ireland^ and in 1853 
he died at Broughton near Manchester, mourned with unctuous 
sentences in the work of Mr. George Parker Knowles, gene- 
alogist and heraldic artist, who is found in 1854 in possession 
of the confidence and intimacy of Mr. Cheyne's friend and 
patron Mr. Coulthart. 



In 1846 appeared the Dictionary of the Commoners^ and Mr. 
Coulthartj throwing aside the bank manager and the computer 
of decimal interest, revealed himself to the world and to 
Ashton-under-Lyne as the eldest born of the most splendid 
line of north Britain, the house of Coulthart of Coulthart 
and CoUyn. At the same time he beckoned forth from the 
press a pedigree — a pedigree which will remain for an 
enduring monument of human impudence and credulity. 
For some nineteen years this pedigree waxed and flourished, 
the wonder and delight of popular genealogists, and although 
the axe was laid smartly to its root in 1865, were hazardous 
to suggest that this great trunk of imposture is now dead and 

The pedigree cannot be better introduced than in the words 
of Mr. George Parker Knowles, written in 1855, at which date 
an edition of the family history of the Coultharts appeared 
sumptuously printed upon vellum, and printed, as a footnote 
vainly stipulates, for private circulation only. Its title is : — 



Genealogical and Heraldic account of the 
Coultharts of Coulthart and Collyn 
Chiefs of the name 
from their first settlement in Scotland in the reign of Conanus 
to the year of our Lord 1854, 

George Parker Knowles 
Genealogist and Heraldic Artist. 

Derived from the family muniments. 

The preface by Mr. George Parker Knowles opens modestly 
enough. He cannot affect ignorance of the fact that fame and 
merit will wait upon the compilers of this work, but of that 
fame he will ask for no more than his share, his humble share. 
The ' transcribing and translating of the old deeds, wills, 
charters, pedigrees, marriage settlements, genealogical notices, 
etc.,' had been accomplished by the departed Cheyne, to whom 
Mr. George Parker Knowles renders a tribute probably as 
heartfelt as one artist might yield to another. ' Judging,' he 
says, ' of that gentleman's learning and research by the mem- 
oranda which he left behind him, it is deeply to be regretted 
that he did not live to bring the undertaking to a conclusion.' 
'Divine Providence,' as Mr. George Parker Knowles admits 


with resignation, ^ordered it otherwise,' and Alexander 
Cheyne, esquire, was in Dethick's bosom. 

But Cheyne was at least happy in his literary executor, 
and we have few regrets for his sake when we are once em- 
barked upon the Genealogical and Heraldic Account. 

Few families can justly claim so ancient and honourable a descent as the 
Coultharts of Coulthart and Collyn, and fewer still can establish their lineage 
by such unerring documentary evidence. Deriving an uninterrupted male 
succession from the era of Julius Agricola, the genealogy is clearly traceable by 
means of monkish chronicles, historical achievements, marriage alliances, royal 
charters, baronial leases, sepulchral inscriptions, sasine precepts, judicial decreets, 
and fragmentary pedigree, to the present lineal representative, who has fur- 
nished me with such an extensive collection of ancestral muniments, partly 
arranged by domestic annalists and antiquaries, that I am enabled to compile 
from the family archives the following brief record of The Coultharts of 
Coulthart and Collyn, chiefs of the name, and also to annex thereto heraldic 
and genealogical accounts of The Rosses of Renfrew, The Macknyghtes of 
Macknyghte, The Glendonyns of Glendonyn, The Carmichaels of Carspherne, 
The Forbeses of Pitscottie, The Mackenzies of Craighall, and The Gordons 
of Sorbie ; who have all, through heiresses, become incorporated with the 
house of Coulthart, as successive generations meandered down the stream of time. 

It is possible that a higher antiquity might have been 
claimed for this illustrious house had the chief of his name and 
family, as Mr. Knowles invariably styles his patron, fallen into 
the hands of a less scrupulous genealogist. But Mr. Knowles, 
pushing aside untrustworthy documents and evidence which 
might perchance have taken the line of Coulthart back to the 
earlier stone age, insists upon ^ confining ' his ' details to the 
evidence of documents obviously authentic' 

He finds, therefore, *the family name and descent to be 
derived from Coulthartus, a Roman lieutenant, who fought 
under Julius Agricola, at the foot of the Grampian mountains, 
when that victorious general was opposed by the confederated 
forces of the Scots, Picts and Danes, under Corbredus Galdus. 
Peace having been restored soon after that decisive engage- 
ment, Coulthartus, instead of returning to Rome, married 
Marsa, daughter of Kadalyne, chief of the Novantes, by whom 
he acquired large territorial possessions near the present Whit- 
horn in the county of Wigtown.' Coulthartus, it would 
appear, was a subaltern of whom even Mr. Spenser Wilkinson 
would approve, being ' versed in all the wisdom and learning 
of the Romans ' — a meet ancestor for his remote descendant 
who penned the famous Decimal Interest 'Tables, He was con- 



tent however to live his retired life as a simple ' Caledonian 
chieftain ' at Leucaphibia, where he died ' beloved and 
lamented ' in the twelfth year of King Conanus. As a Roman 
soldier he had done his duty : such a man could have done no 
less as a Caledonian chieftain. He dies all unconscious that he 
has founded the most wondrous pedigree on earth, or that 
such distant bards as Alexander Cheyne, BA., and George 
Parker Knowles will wake the string in praise of the line of 

His son Julius, the hope of the house, is famous as the 
builder of several strong castles near Adrian's Wall. He died 
as became the son of Coulthartus in routing a band of Irish 
robbers which infested the Western Islands of Scotland, and is 
succeeded by his brother, whom Coulthartus had quaintly 
named Ackaline. 

It is not in length only that the line of Coulthart is to excel 
all other houses. Ancient families whose scanty chronicles 
yield but that fact that John follows James, to be followed by 
another John, will marvel, and marvelling will envy, when 
they see how virtue, courage, piety and muscular develop- 
ment bring forth their due fruit in each generation of the 
Roman subaltern's children. 

Ackaline fights heroically under King Ethodius, and that 
against the Romans themselves, which speaks well for that 
sovereign's wise policy towards the families of uitlanders, and 
he brings up a son, Doraldus I. This Doraldus loses his 
life whilst suppressing another rebellion in those troublesome 
Western Islands, and begets Moradus his son and heir. 

By this time the house of Coulthart is one which kings 
delight to honour. Of Moradus we are told that such 
was the esteem in which he was held by King Donaldus I. 
that he was present at that monarch's funeral by special in- 
vitation. This courtesy is well repaid by Thorwaldus, son 
of Moradus, who ' exerts himself greatly ' in deposing the 
usurper Nathalocus, placing upon the Scottish throne the 
true lineal successor of Ethodius II. 

Of Coulthartus II., son of Thorwaldus, we are told that 
he ' surpassed most men of his time in the manly exercises of 
running, riding, shooting arrows, throwing the dart, and 
wielding the battle-axe.' Of his golfing record nothing seems 
to be known, but the prowess of his remote descendants with 
the long bow is here traced to its source. His son Diorthaca, 


husband of Arnica, daughter of Bathircus, embraced the 
Christian religion, and here has its spring the traditional piety 
of the Coultharts. We may note that his representative the 
banker and author insists, before putting his family history 
into type, that Mr. George Parker Knowles shall solemnly 
sign and attest his work in the presence of the Lord Bishop of 
Manchester and of the incumbent of St. Matthew's, Man- 
chester. Thenceforward the chronicle goes gallantly on, and 
no Coulthart is found wanting in the family qualities. The 
throne of Scotland, in those ages which would be dark enough 
but for the lantern light of the Coulthart pedigree, was of a 
truth propped and shored up by the reckless loyalty of the 

Cornelius son of Diorthaca is slain in battle with the 
Picts. It is by the aid of Moralinthus his son that Picts, 
Romans and Britons are routed by Eugenius II. at the memo- 
rable battle on the banks of the Cree, perishing himself with 
his elder sons Galdus and Halinthus in the equally memo- 
rable battle on the banks of the Dee. Our grief for these 
fallen heroes is chastened by the thought that Orpheus, the 
youngest born of Moralinthus, is forced ' to fly with other 
religious men to Icolmkill.' To this breathing space we owe 
the early history of the line of Coulthartus, for ' in learned 
seclusion, Orpheus wrote a chronicle of the times in which he 
lived, including the preceding annals of his ancestors,' the 
accumulations of which must by this time have cried aloud for 
a fitting chronicler. In such wise did Orpheus begin what 
George Parker Knowles was to complete. In the case of 
Tyrus his son the Venerable Bede comes to the assistance of 
Mr. Knowles, relating in his chronicle that Tyrus dwelt in his 
days at Coulthart, an estate which we now hear of for the 
first time. Coulthart, which must have taken its name from 
Agricola's lieutenant, is described by Bede {teste Mr. Knowles) 
as near Epiacum in Galloway. Tyrus was present at the 
ratification of the treaty of peace between Fergus II. and 
Placidus, and was slain in the general engagement between 
the allied Scots, Picts and Welsh and the Roman forces. By 
this time death for the fatherland had become for the Coul- 
tharts something more than a sweet and decorous thing. It 
was a passion, a fascination and a habit. 

CoNANETH son of Tyrus routs Britons for Eugenius II. 
and spends ' the evening of his life in the exercise of charity, 


devotion and other Christian virtues.' Doubtless in this pious 
leisure he found time to post up the family chronicle, which 
must have been again neglected by the stirring generations 
which followed Orpheus. He begets Paulus, ' also an exceed- 
ingly religious man/ who drives from the Scottish border the 
Saxons under Hengist and Octa. His grandson Coulthartus 
III., moved to emulation by the deeds of his namesake 
Coulthartus IL, is famous in his age for his skill 'in the 
military exercises of the age in which he lived,' his taste 
therein shaming our own War Office, whose interest is 
ever fixed upon the military exercises of earlier ages than 
our own. Eutacus son of Coulthartus revives a family 
custom, and is killed fighting under King Aidanus, leaving 
a younger son Moraldus, a monk famed for his miracles, 
and an heir Kentyrus, who achieved one of those records 
which have been of late so popular, being present at four 
coronations. We pass Doraldus II., a famous warrior, 
GoLFRiDus, who made peace for Scotland by ' a lengthy 
interview ' with St. Cuthbert, and Kinotellus, killed under 
King Amberkelethus, to arrive at Coulthartus IV. The 
recurrence of the famous name brings new honours to the 
house of Coulthart, and Coulthartus IV. would seem to have 
been pious to a degree notable even in his family. In such 
wise generation follows generation, and chief succeeds chief. 
Ever the records grow of deeds of war and piety, ever the 
sons of Coulthartus are the right hand of their sovereign. 
DoNATUs wins glory in the wars, Cornelius II. meets the 
family fate at Haddington, and Dunstane his son is ' basely 
beheaded ' with Alpinus his king. 

With MoRDACHus son of Dunstane we get another glimpse 
of the pride of place of the family. It would appear that only 
a few Scottish noblemen ' anxiously desired to punish without 
delay the Picts for their unparalleled baseness and barbarity,' 
but Mordachus was one of those few, and by his counsel and 
influence the punitive expedition was raised which was to blot 
out the very name of Pict. As Mordachus dies full of years 
and honour at Coulthart Castle we see that the old stammhaus 
mentioned by Bede is rising with the family in importance. 
Fergus and Cuthbertus are succeeded by Coulthartus V., a 
great builder and, alas ! a restorer of churches. Cornelius III. 
is created Thane of Galloway, and we may note that up to 
this point the family services had not even earned a baronetcy 


from the ungrateful men who owed their thrones to the line. 
The Thane is killed in battle near Buchan, and his grandson 
OsBERTUs, son of JowethuSj fights at Loncarty. Waluain 
son of Osbertus is killed at Murthlack, and Donaldus his son, 
' though scarcely arrived at man's estate when the responsibili- 
ties of the chiefship of his family devolved upon him, was 
almost immediately called to the councils of his sovereign.' 
Old or young a Coulthart must be forthcoming. His son 
CouLTHARTus VI., baron or lord of Coulthart, is tempted by 
Macbeth, but a usurper can hope for no aid in war or council 
from a Coulthart, and Coulthartus VI. ^ joyfully joined, with 
aU his retainers, the standard of Malcolm Kianmore when that 
prince returned to his native land.' 

Alfred son of Coulthart was summoned by King Malcolm 
' to a conference at Forfar, to determine as to the best means 
of placing the kingdom of Scotland in a posture of defence 
against the anticipated invasion of William Duke of Nor- 
mandy, commonly called William the Conqueror.' By 
reason of his sage counsels William, Duke of Normandy, 
was forced to abandon his schemes, and to this Alfred 
some further acknowledgments are made by the grudging 
sovereign. King Malcolm grants him a confirmation charter 
of the barony of Coulthart with a condition that the chief 
of Coulthart should furnish three horses to the king of 
Scotland in war time, for which reason three colts courant have 
ever since been borne by the family of Coulthart as an armorial 
ensign. The distinction was no doubt the more prized by the 
family for its singularity, the invention of heraldic bearings 
belonging to a later age. Unique as was the honour the 
grateful Coultharts soon paid their debt in full. The name of 
Theobald, a second son, ' occurs as being one of MacdufF s 
followers in keeping Macbeth's rebellious party in subjection.' 
GoDOFREDus, lord of Coulthart, ' actively opposed the usurpa- 
tions of Donald Bane and Duncan,' whilst Reginaldus his 
brother distinguishes himself at the battle of Lothian. 

Sir Radulphus de Coulthart claims our attention as ' the 
first laird on record that used the territorial designation as a 
surname,' and hearing this we feel that we are at last on the 
home track towards our banker-mayor. His heir Sir Peter 
de Coulthart, ' chief of his name and family,' contributes 
^ to the relief of the Christians in Jerusalem,' and the younger 
brothers of Sir Peter add their swords to their brother's sub- 



scription and are killed together at Acre. In William de 
C0ULTHART5 the famous piety of the family is honoured by 
Pope Innocent III., who speaks of him, of course in a bull, as 
* chief of his name.' Sir Roger de Coulthart 'was invested 
with the knightly girdle by Alexander II. at the Royal 
Haddington tournament in 1240.* It must have been his 
prowess at Haddington which won him the white hand of 
Isabella, a daughter of Walter Stewart, hereditary High 
Steward of Scotland. The jealousy of her kinsmen may 
account for the omission of this lady from all the pedigrees ot 
Stewart. The knightly girdle was not all that Sir Roger 
was invested with at Haddington. The king ' heraldically 
added to the three black colts courant on his silver shield a 
fess sable, which armorial ensigns have ever since, without 
alteration, been borne by the chiefs of the family.' The arms 
are borne upon the seal, with which another Sir Roger seals a 
grant of lands in 1443. The seal, of which many illustrations 
exist, is as notable as aught else Coulthartian. The legend 
Sigillvm Covltharti is unique. The helm above the shield 
is the barrel helm of the thirteenth century, the supporters 
of the colt and the hart suggest the fifteenth century, whilst 
the colt's head crest is borne sidelong on the helm in the 
manner of the nineteenth century. 

Alexander de Coulthart, son of the valiant j ouster, com- 
mands ' a battalion of the Scottish army at the battle of Largs,' 
and marries a lady mysteriously described as ' Helen, daughter 
of the De Roberton, co. Lanark,' but we must hurry by four 
generations illustrated by piety and learning, and by the deaths 
of two brothers Coulthart at Nevill's Cross, to Gilbert de 
Coulthart, in whom we see the first trace of dissatisfaction in 
this generous race, the most ancient house in Scotland, 
warriors who marked every notable battle by falling in it 
covered with glorious wounds, territorial magnates who 
matched with Stewarts, Crawfords, Montgomerys, Hays and 
St. Clairs. The peerage which nowadays rewards the enterprise 
of our brewers was denied to them, and they remain, like 
Coulthartus their founder, simple ' Caledonian chieftains.' 
What wonder is it that Gilbert de Coulthart carries his mighty 
sword oversea and rebukes his country by dying at Dantzic 
in the service of Prussia against the Turks. 

But his sons forgive. For the next four generations the 
Coultharts resume their ancestral customs, and each chief dies 


in the field against Scotland's enemies. The first of these 
doomed warriors was Sir Roger, who rushed upon his fate at 
Roxburgh Castle in 1460. The warlike spirit of another Roger 
is released at Sauchyburn. Flodden with its hecatomb of Scot- 
tish nobles, demands its Coulthart, and Richard de Coulthart, 
* chief of the name ' obeys. Cuthbert son of Richard, a man * of 
extraordinary physical powers ' — a true Coulthart in short — finds 
that even his strength cannot retrieve the fortunes of Flodden, 
and saves his life on that day. If he had not so escaped there 
might have been no Coulthart corpse decorating the field of 
Solway Moss, where he falls ^ commanding a division of the 
Scottish army with admirable courage and discretion.' 

After the death of Cuthbert the family hangs up the sword 
of Coulthartus — the military career is henceforward for its cadets. 
The heads of the house, who are now ' of Coulthart and Larg- 
more,' stay at home, enlarge their mansions and cultivate their 
fields, producing at last one Richard Coulthart of Coulthart and 
Largmore, ' an eminent practical agriculturalist and author of 
the once celebrated work entitled "The Economy of Agriculture, 
He died in 1717 leaving issue a son, James Coulthart of 
Coulthart and Largmore,' chief of his name and family, great- 
grandfather of our John Ross Coulthart, bank manager and 
litterateur^ of Coulthart, CoUyn and Ashton-under-Lyne. 
Fifty-eighth in descent from the lieutenant of Agricola, he 
was in lonely splendour the last of his line. His only sister 
had bestowed her hand upon one James MacGuffie, surely a 
mesalliance for one of her race, since even Mr. George 
Parker Knowles could only trace the MacGuffies to a John 
MacGuffie, who had fallen at Flodden beside, it may be, 
the valiant Richard de Coulthart. But as the Coultharts 
were alone amongst the Scottish nobles in their use of arms 
before the invention of those distinctions even so the ancestral 
MacGuffie served his country as a colonel in her army before 
that rank had become recognized by the Scottish War Office. 

The pedigree of the bonny house of Coulthart of Coult- 
hart was drunk in greedily by the hungry wastes of the Landed 
Gentry books which were then in their high noon. It was the 
great day of fantastic legends of ancestry, but no matter in 
what collection of imaginative chronicles it was welcomed as a 
guest the history of the Coultharts stood, even as its chiefs 
were described by their admiring sovereigns in charter and 
deed, facile primarius. For twenty years it ran its course 



unchallenged and unquestioned, a fact which vouches for our 
fathers' hearty appetite for wonders. It was ' the stoup, the 
pride, the ornament ' of Dictionaries of Commoners and 
Landed Gentry, of Illuminated Visitations, of County Family 
books, of Anecdotes of Heraldry. The arms of Coulthart 
with its noble quarterings, its historic crest and supporters as 
borne upon Sir Roger's seal, were illustrated in all the armories 
and books of heraldric illustration. 

Such books as Lower's Patronymica Britannica and Ander- 
son's Genealogy and Surnames took the story of Coulthartus to 
their bosoms, whilst the latter author's Scottish Nation^ a work 
whose three volumes still cumber the shelves of reference 
libraries and trip up the antiquarian neophyte, enrolled the 
whole tale amongst the glories of Scottish history. The very 
name of Coulthart was made the text for the wildest etymolo- 
gies of bewildered guessers, bogged by the fact that the 
descendants of Coulthartus, having used no surname for thirty- 
four generations, assumed the surname at the time of the first 
crusade, not from the memory of their Roman forbear, but 
from their land called Coulthart. Mr. Anderson wrote : — 

It would be useless to speculate on its original signification beyond what is 
supplied in giving the name of its first recorded possessor in Scotland, though 
we may add that all the earliest traditions and etymologies regarding it, and 
also all the armorial bearings belonging to it, refer the derivation to the 
prowess and valour of a Roman horse-soldier. 

Mr. Anderson is not an easy author to follow upon his 
speculative journeys into philology, but it seems fairly plain 
that, in his opinion at least, Coulthartus is a name akin to 
Lionheartus or the like familiar names in Latin. Coulthartus 
being ' a Roman horse-soldier ' was imbued with the courage 
of the mettled colt he bestrode. Hence we arrive with ease 
at the origin of his name. 

Mr. Lower, esteemed in his day an antiquary of some 
weight, decorated his paragraph concerning the Coulthart 
name with the famous Coulthart seal, and added to Mr. 
Anderson's etymology the illuminating remark that — 

the name of the Scottish locality is probably synonymous with that ot 
Coudhard, a village in the department of Orne, a few miles N.E. of Argentan. 

Time having made his ravenous meal of all the ancient 
monuments of the house, the extreme magnificence of which, 
as vouched for in the Coulthart history, had doubtless tempted 


the spoiler and iconoclast, altar-tombs to the illustrious dead 
sprang up mysteriously by the churches of Kells and Kirkpatrick 
Fleming, and a window by Willement, in the Gothic taste of 
Great Exhibition days, glazed a gable in the church of Bolton- 
le-Gate, bearing the arms, crest, quarterings and supporters of 
the Coultharts and the shield of the MacGuffies. Dr. James 
Prince Lee, Bishop of Manchester, the same obliging prelate 
who had witnessed Mr. Knowles' solemn declaration of good 
faith attached to the pedigree, wrote the inscription for another 
altar-tomb in Bolton church when in 1847 Mr. John Ross 
Coulthart succeeded to the chieftaincy of his name. Of course 
Mr. William Coulthart is described by the good bishop in the 
quaint language of the Coulthart charters as ffiulfelmus Coultfjart 
tiz Coultfjart £t Collgn arm. genii's nominisque mz facile primartus. 

The paper boat, or parchment boat to be exact, sailed down 
stream with favouring winds until 1865. 

In 1866 copies of the Coulthart publications were for- 
warded to Mr. John Gough Nichols, F.S.A., for notice in 
his Herald and Genealogist, The review which followed was 
an amazing one when we consider the credit which Mr. 
Nichols enjoyed as an antiquary. The story of Coulthartus, 
of Ackaline, of Moraldus, Orpheus and Theodore was swal- 
lowed whole after a little preliminary gaping and wondering. 
The grant of arms by Malcolm Kianmore was boggled at, 
Mr. Nichols considering * the epoch too early for the origin 
of armorial bearings,' and questioning whether arms punning 
upon the surname would have been assumed two generations 
before the surname was assumed. But Mr. Nichols allowed 
nothing for the memory which such an ancestor as Coulthartus 
1. must have left behind. The seal of Roger de Coulthart 
was accepted meekly enough, the reviewer contenting himself 
with the remark that the inscription sigillvm covltharti was 
* unusual in form.' After the death of Sir Gilbert at Dantzic 
Mr. Nichols was of opinion that ' for some generations after, the 
fate of each successive head of the family is remarkable.' A 
picture of the seal, another of the Bolton window, and nine 
more of the Coulthart arms and quarters were gratefully 
accepted by Mr. Nichols for the decoration of his pages, 
and the Coulthart bookplate was made frontispiece for the 
year's volume. 

But before this review was in type the storm has broken 
from a clear sky. A pamphlet no bigger than a man's hand 



had been already put about in Edinburgh, the anonymous 
work of the learned George Burnett, and within a few months 
* all ' as Mr. John Evelyn of Wotton would have put it,' was 

After fifty-eight generations woe came upon the house of 
Coulthartus, the like of which had not been in all the glorious 
and checkered record. When Moralinthus fell upon the banks 
of the Dee and with him Galdus and Halinthus ; when Orpheus^ 
taking with him little but writing materials, was in full flight 
for Icolmkill, the fortunes of the house must have seemed gloomy 
and unpromising. But worse was here. The house which 
rolled back in turn Pict, Roman, Saxon, Dane and Englishman 
took Mr. Burnett's quill between the joints of the harness. 
Like that of the Yorkshire house of Squeers the coat of arms 
of the Coultharts ' was tore', and the great cloud of ancestors 
had flown into the air like startled pigeons. Coulthartus, 
Ackaline, Orpheus, Roger of the tournament, Gilbert the 
wanderer, Cuthbert the huge and valiant, all were gone. 
In the ear of Mr. John Ross Coulthart, where he sat gloomy 
and alone, chief of his name and last of his race in every sense 
of the word, the boding voice of the family banshee must 
have grown to a positive shriek. 

Mr. Burnett triumphed with a cruel triumph. Mr. John 
Gough Nichols made such hurried amends as might be made 
for the unfortunate hospitality which the Herald and Genealo- 
gist had shown towards Mr. Knowles's chronicle, and the 
County Families and Landed Gentries made haste to straiten 
the space which they had afibrded so lavishly to the house 
of Coulthart of Coulthart, Collyn, Largmore and Ashton- 

The family estates followed the ancestors, disappearing 
from the face of the map. Coulthart and its castle were 
sought vainly in atlas and gazetteer. According to Mr. 
Burnett no such lands as those of Coulthart existed or had 
ever existed in Wigtownshire. 

No family of Coulthart had been known in Scotland or 
elsewhere. As freeholders they were sought for in the 
register of retours at Edinburgh, and not a single name was 
forthcoming in that great record of the Scottish landed houses. 
They were sought as feuars or leaseholders, but the sasine 
register was silent as was the register of retours. History 
and record alike failed to yield a single Coulthart of the line. 


and the pedigree was again examined for its abounding refer- 
ences to chronicle and charter. Ptolemy and Tacitus, who had 
commemorated the earlier heads of the house, were searched 
at first hand, but the passages had been wiped from their pages. 
The Venerable Bede had vouched for the descendants of 
Coulthartus as living in his day at the foot of the Grampians, 
but set in the box and questioned by Mr. Burnett this treach- 
erous father denied his statement made to Mr. Knowles and 
Mr. Cheyne. 

The few Coulthart charters printed by Mr. Knowles were 
tracked down by the enemies of imaginative genealogy, and 
they at least were forthcoming in the Great Seal Register, but 
certain peculiarities could not escape notice. Where the name 
Coulthart occurred in the muniments gathered by Mr. Cheyne 
other names were found in the charters in the register. A 
grant to Johanni de Coulthart militi appeared as to Alexandra de 
Meynies militi. The famous royal charter to Willielmo de 
Coulthart gentis nominisque sui facile primario appeared as to 
Gilberto de Glencharny^ whose name was followed by no such 
subtle royal compliment, and the barony of Coulthart was 
changed to the barony of Glencharny. It was pointed out 
that Mr. Coulthart's ancient charters followed, oddly enough, 
the form of the charters in the abbreviated form afforded by 
the printed volume of the Great Seal Register, rather than the 
fuller form which original charters had taken. When we con- 
sider the carping spirit, the malicious distrustfulness, which 
now characterized the inquiry into the Coulthart pedigree it 
will be readily understood that attention was directed to such 
details as these. 

Other Coulthart documents were examined with much 
cruel mirth. It was not the fault of the chief of Coulthart that 
he possessed a family marriage settlement dated in the twenty- 
first year of King Kennethus III., who only reigned from 997 
to 1005. Yet much was made of this singularity of the date, 
and more of the fact that the national collections of Scotland 
contained no written legal documents before the close of the 
eleventh century. Still more matter for laughter was found 
in the fact that the settlement was made upon the marriage 
of William de Coulthart with Angus de Cumin, and it was 
freely suggested that the well learned Mr. Cheyne had con- 
sidered Angus nothing but an earlier version of the name 



The houses whose representation had passed into the 
broad stream of Coulthart, adding quarterings to its great 
shield, were next raked over in the same ungenerous humour. 
One and all were declared fabulous as Coulthart. Glendonyn 
of Glendonyn, perhaps suggested by a passage in the Monastery^ 
came first to the handling. These Coulthart Glendonyns 
were of Glendonyn in Ayrshire, and the fact that the only 
known family and lands of Glendonyn were in Roxburgh- 
shire was held to be evidence against Mr. Coulthart's quar- 
tering. Macknyghte of Macknyghte was sought through 
chronicles, pedigree books and records and was not found, 
although the arms of this house were forthcoming in the shape 
of a shield recorded as that of Macnaught of Kilquharity. 
Carmichael of Carspherne, according to Mr. Knowles, was a 
quiet living family which had made little history. Needless 
to say, the shyness of the lairds of Carspherne became still 
more pronounced when Mr. Burnett came to seek traces of 
them. The family of Ross of Renfrew would have succeeded 
to a peerage had the Scottish house of lords been aware of their 
descent, but the pedigree of the Lords Ross had ignored this 
famous branch. Forbes of Pitscottie and Gordon of Sorbie 
were cried for in vain by genealogists, and no ancestral voice 
replied from either house. When the armorial bearings of 
these families were demanded of the Lyon Office, the Lyon 
Office confessed its inability to exemplify them, and the 
armories from Davy Lindsay to Nisbet were drawn in vain 
for the shields figuring as Mr. Coulthart's quarterings. 

The later chroniclers quoted by Mr. Cheyne were sifted to 
Mr. Cheyne's discredit as an accurate note-taker. Of Gilbert 
de Coulthart, who went in the train of Earl Douglas to Rome 
in 1449, we read in the chronicle : — 

Thair were utheris of lower estates, as Coulthai-t, Urquhart, Campbell, 
Forester and Lowther, all knightis and gentlemen whose convoy maid the Earle 
so proud and insolent. 

With a Coulthart in his train the intolerable pride of Earl 
Douglas might be pardoned, but Mr. Cheyne, by some 
strange error, had read Coulthart in the chronicle where Calder 
was, and the passage in the original can hardly be said to 
illustrate the foreign adventures of the valiant Gilbert. 

Leaving chronicles and heraldry the critics fell to trivialities. 
Here on the pedigree was a captain of the Royal Artillery 
under James L, who must have been at that time the only 


commissioned officer of a corps which was raised long after his 
death. To an Admiral Coulthart of the royal navy who 
flourished in the early sixteenth century the like objection was 

Criticism having done its fell work, constructive genealogy 
set up its scaffolding and attempted to rebuild the pedigree 
upon new evidences. But here, where the ancient methods 
of the Elizabethans, of Cheyne and of Knowles, had been 
followed with such success, modern inquiry met failure only. 

When Pip, the Pip of Great Expectations^ had confessed to 
Joe Gargery that his tale of the wonders of Miss Havisham's 
household as told to his sister and Uncle Pumblechook had 
not its base upon fact, it will be remembered how the good Joe 
pleaded for a single marvel to remain as a truth. If there was 
no black velvet coach ' at least there was dogs, Pip } Come, 
Pip,' said Joe persuasively, ' if there warn't no weal cutlets, at 
least there was dogs } A dog,' said Joe, ' a puppy } Come ! ' 

If there be one name in the pedigree of Coulthart upon 
which the genealogist might set his finger and say, ' Surely 
here be truths,' it is the name of ' Richard Coulthart of 
Coulthart and Largmore, an eminent agriculturist, and author 
of the once celebrated work entitled the Economy of Agriculture,^ 
The words carry conviction, and when we are told that he too 
is as shadowy as Moralinthus or Kentyrus, and that the once 
celebrated work entitled the Economy of Agriculture has dis- 
appeared not only from the farmer's table, but also from all 
libraries and catalogues of libraries, we sympathize with Joe 
Gargery's demand for a single puppy. 

No pedigree however short ever took the place of the great 
work of Messrs. Cheyne and Knowles. But the Coulthart 
estate of Largmore furnished some slight clue. The barony of 
Largmore shrunk, it is true, upon examination, to a little farm 
in Kells, but that at least remained upon the map when 
Coulthart and Collyn had faded from sight. This farm had 
been purchased by a shrewd, although half-witted farm labourer 
named James Coulthart, playfully entitled 'Laird Cowtart,' 
and commemorated in a dozen Galloway folk tales as the 
obstinate man who sat all night in his field because the good 
wife had called him indoors to his broth a second time when he 
had warned her to call him once only. It is probable at least 
that he was the grandfather of William Coulthart, father of 
the last chief. 




When all else had gone one does not look for the arms ot 
Coulthart of Coulthart to survive the fate of the land and 
pedigree. But they remained ! The supporters of the colt and 
the hart trotted back together to their twelfth century deviser, 
but the shield remained. 

A glance at an ordinary of arms revealed the fact that Mr. 
Coulthart had begun his career as a Scottish chieftain by 
assuming, doubtless under the advice of Mr. Cheyne, the shield 
of arms appertaining to his name. Or rather, as no such shield 
was forthcoming, Mr. Cheyne braced upon his client's arm 
the nearest and handiest shield of a family whose name might 
be considered as remotely resembling the chieftain's own. 
This happened to be the shield of arms of the well known 
family of the Colts of Essex and Suffolk, created baronets in 
1692. It will amaze even those who are acquainted with the 
methods of dead and gone heralds to learn that Mr. Coulthart 
was allowed by the Lyon Office at Edinburgh the stolen coat 
of the Colts. The nature and impudence of his assumption 
can hardly have escaped notice, yet the shield was officially 
recorded as his property in November, 1846, the grant being 
made out in the name of Mr. Coulthart's father, who was then 
living. Ten years afterwards, on the strength of the Lord 
Lyon's complacent venality, Mr. Coulthart attempted to record 
the same shield at the English College of Arms. Here he 
failed. A line must be drawn somewhere, and the College of 
Arms drew it at recording the undifferenced coat of a living 
baronet to a Lancashire bank-manager who derived from Scot- 
land his dissimilar surname. 

A compromise however was arrived at, and the chief of his 
name and race suffered himself to be persuaded to take out in 
England a second grant of arms, possibly for use at Ashton- 
under-Lyne, whereby his undeniably commercial pursuits 
might not tarnish the ancient shield derived from the eleventh 
century Alfred and on record at the Lyon Office. The new 
shield is Colt with a difference. The colours remain, and one 
of the two colts above the fesse ; but below the fesse, in place of 
the third colt is a black water-bouget taken from the Shield of 
Ross and speaking of the chieftain's descent from the Lords 
Ross of Renfrew. In this curious document the grantee was, 
as we understand, described with all his territorial titles, as 
'John Ross Coulthart of Coulthart, CoUyn and Ashton, 


Mr. Burnett's mingled criticism and satire were slow 
to leaven the genealogical bookshelf. But by degrees the 
Coulthart legend faded and grew less. The pedigrees shortened 
and disappeared, the armories gave the shield of Coulthart with 
less and less of commentary on the antiquity of the house, and 
the peerages were slowly purged from the matches which the 
daughters of peers had been allowed to contract with fifteenth 
and sixteenth century chiefs of Coulthart and Largmore. At 
last the shield itself disappeared from all modern works but the 
semi-official list of recorded Scottish arms issued by the present 
Lord Lyon King of Arms, from which, indeed, it can hardly 
be expunged without affecting the value of the book as a 

Yet such a pedigree sleeps but to wake. The new scrap- 
books of heraldry and genealogy have need of its stately 
proportions, and we shall not look in vain for a reference to 
it amongst those genealogical paragraphs in newspapers and, 
magazines which add gaiety to our column of ' What is Be- 

It was never discredited by those who love such things in 
sincerity. An often exposed medium may be deserted at last 
by the most faithful listeners for table raps, but an exposed 
pedigree never wants for friends. 

The Coulthart pedigree found its last loyal friend in Mr. 
Joseph Foster, who is still making us our popular books of 
arms and pedigrees. Many years after the Coulthart exposure 
Mr. Foster found the neglected pedigree of Coulthart, smoothed 
out its creases and printed it entire — from Coulthartus L to his 
fifty-eighth descendant — in a great volume of Lancashire Pedi- 
grees, The only detail we can find which struck Mr. Foster 
as an unlikely one and needing an editor's hand was the title 
of the early sixteenth-century Admiral R.N., and this officer's 
exact rank is therefore left unindicated by his last chronicler. 
The record of a still more notable officer, the major who, 
although safe in the army of King Charles II., fled abroad for 
dread of the wrath of Oliver Cromwell and never returned, is 
left with its early bloom upon it by the unsuspicious Mr. 
Foster ! The grant of arms in the eleventh century is solemnly 
recited, although the pictured arms in the margin are those of 
the more modern grant of 1859. 

To add salt to the performance Mr. Foster's preface to 
Lancashire Pedigrees tells us that ' The day is past, except for 



the day, to publish apochryphal pedigrees. Ingenuity cannot 
hide an obscure origin, nor a distinguished descent be con- 
cealed. Truth is sought for ingenuously and successfully.' 

With Mr. Foster in the ascendant, still seeking truth 
ingenuously and successfully, crabbed Archaeology has no 
reason to grudge Romance her Corelli. 




IN my book-hunting days I acquired, some years ago, a 
copy of T^he Book of Common Prayer according to the use of 
the Church of Ireland printed in the year 1721. It was a 
nice copy bound in black morocco with silver corners and 
clasps, and originally there had been a silver monogram ' H.R.' 
in the centre of each cover ; on the title page is written 
'E.M.H. etc' The fly-leaves are all covered with writing 
in a neat feminine hand signed at the end in a bold hand ' E. 
Moira Hastings.* This signature is evidently that of Lady 
Elizabeth Hastings, eldest daughter of Theophilus ninth Earl 
of Huntingdon, who inherited the baronies of Hastings de 
Hastings and Hastings de Hungerford on her brother's death 
in 1789, which proves that the notes in this volume must have 
been made between that date and the writer's death in 1808. 
This lady was the third wife of Sir John Rawdon, 4th Bart., 
who was elevated to the peerage of Ireland as Baron Rawdon 
of Moira, co. Down, and created Earl of Moira 30 Jan. 
1762. As this marriage took place in 1752, it may be 
assumed that the interesting account of the ancestry of 
Helena Graham, which forms the subject of this writing was 
committed to paper towards the close of the eighteenth century. 
I was much interested in perusing these pages of MS. writ- 
ten so long since, and though the genealogical information 
therein set forth may be well known to students of Scotch 
genealogies, still it seemed to me sufficiently interesting to 
entitle it to find a nook in the pages of ^The Ancestor, The 
dry bones of genealogies are caviare to the multitude, but in 
this case, being clothed with a touch of romance, they have 
an additional interest which I trust will render this article 
interesting to the general reader. 

One cannot help being struck with the keen spirit with 
which the writer carefully tabulated the descent of the 
honours — the loss of which she so pathetically bewails — as 
well as with the gentle touch of irony when she writes, ' The 

Scotch claim conveyed honor — the Conway conveyed (if 




gained) profit & the gratification of resentment.' Not the 
least interesting portion of the MS. is, perhaps, the descriptive 
account given of ' the various trifles belonging to the family 
esteemed as consequential appendages,' and her grief at the 
modernization of the watch given by King Charles II. to the 
last Earl of Menteith will appeal to the sympathies of many, 
whilst one's mirth will be provoked at the mention of the 
' wedding night-cap ' of the last Earl of Menteith, especially 
when one tries to picture the renowned Earl's appearance 
clothed in such an article of head-gear ! The Rawdons were 
an old West Riding family seated at Rawdon near Leeds, and 
several of them — in successive generations — entered the army 
and rendered a good account of themselves fighting for their 
king. One of them, George Rawdon, attached to Lord 
Conway's regiment of foot, distinguished himself in the ' Irish 
Rebellion' of 1641, and as a reward for his services was by 
King Charles II. in 1665 created a Baronet of Ulster, by letters 
patent dated 20th May, and presumably had a grant of land, 
as thereafter Moira in County Down became their chief place 
of residence and the source of their subsequent title of Earl 
Moira. This George Rawdon was previously secretary to 
Edward, Lord Conway, principal Secretary of State, whose 
eldest daughter Dorothy he married in 1654 ; she died in 
1676 leaving three sons surviving, whereof Edward, born in 
1655, and John, born in 1656, both fell fighting in France some 
years later, so that Arthur the youngest, born 17 Oct. 1671, 
became the heir of the family and was the husband of Helen 
or Helena Graham the heiress of this MS. Sir Arthur died 
17 Oct. 1695, ^g^<i 33? his widow Lady Helena died a few 
years later in 1709, leaving issue one son. Sir John Rawdon, 
Bart., who succeeded to the family estate, and a daughter 
Isabella, who was married in 17 19 to Sir Richard Levinge, 
Bart. This Sir John married in 1 7 1 7 Dorothy, second daughter 
of Sir Richard Levinge, Bart., Speaker of the House of Com- 
mons, and was succeeded by his son Sir John, who was ele- 
vated as above stated to the peerage of Ireland as Baron 
Rawdon of Moira, co. Down, and whose third wife was 
Lady Elizabeth Hastings the writer of the following MS. 


Pedigree of Helena Graham, Lady Rawdon 

King Robert the ist 

Marjory Bruce = Walter Ld. High Steward 

Waiter Ld. High Steward zd. son 


Sir John Stewart of Railston zd. son 

King Robert zd. = Euphemia Ross 
I zd. wife 

David Earl of = 

Heiress zd. wife 

Sr. Patrick Graham = Euphemia Stewart 
by his first wife ances- 
tor to the Dukes of 

Sr. Patrick Graham Earl = Lady Euphemia Stewart 

of Strathern in Jur. Uxor. I Heiress & Countess of Strathern 

Malise Earl of Strathern. King James the 5th 
reannexed Strathern to the Crown & gave him 
in lieu of it the Earldom of Menteith 


Alexander Ld. Kinpont ob. v.p. 

Alexander zd. Earl of Menteith 

Wm. 3d. Earl of Menteith 

Walter Ancestor of the Grahams of Gartur mentioned 
as the present male Representatives of this line 

John 4th Earl of Menteith 

William 5th Earl of Menteith 

John 6th Earl of Menteith 

William 7th Earl of Menteith had the title of = Agnes daughter 

Earl of Strathern restored to him by Charles 
the 1st. It was afterwards revoked & there 
was again a creation or Restoration to him of 
the titles of Airth and Menteith 

of Lord Gray 
the 7th of that 

John Ld. Kinpont murdered 
in Montrose's Camp in his 
Father's lifetime 

Sr. James Graham = Helen a daughter 

zd. son 

of Primate Bram- 
hall & a coheiress 
to his Br. Sr. 
Thos. Bramhall 

Sr. Charles Graham 
3d. son died unm. 

William 8th Earl of Airth & Menteith 
died unmarried Sept. Z4th, 1694, & left 
his estate to the Montrose family. This 
Ld. had z sisters — Mary wife of George 
AUardice & Elizabeth wife of Sr. 
William Graham of Gartmore — these 
certainly did not leave issue 

Sr. Arthur Rawdon Bt.= Helen Graham 
I heiress 

Sir John Rawdon Bart.— 

, ' 

John Rawdon Earl of= 
Moira j 

Francis Hastings Rawdon 

Earl of Moira 



It seems that there has appeared Claimants to the title of Airth and 
Menteith, from the families of Allardice and Graham of Gartmore. No 
person would be more averse to claiming the Ancient Hereditary Honors of 
another family, than I should be, holding such adventitious gifts of Fortune in 
a sacred degree of estimation. But I am persuaded from the proofs that have 
fallen beneath my inspection that in the lineal line direct that the claims 
(whatever they may be) rest with the present Lord Moira. 

The Family Letters from Scotland to Helen Graham all treat her as 
Heiress of the Family. Lord Kinpont was murdered in the Marquis of 
Montrose's Camp in 1644, he married Lady Mary Keith Daughter of W"" 
Earl Mareschal, by whom he left three children Earl of Airth and 
Menteith, and Mary and Elizabeth both styled Hon^^^- This Earl died the 
12^^^ of Sep'^ 1694 — younger of the family must therefore be 50 years of 
age at his death, some of them more, & it was impossible that if the sisters 
had had issue by their respective marriages it should not have been known by 
their family, & allied as they were, & descended from the greatest families, 
& the * reddest Blood ' in Scotland that their claims w*^ not have been 
supported is improbable. One particular relation & Correspondent I place 
much dependance on — Lord Gray married Lady Mary Stewart daughter of 
Rob'^ Stewart, Earl of Orkney by her he had an only son Andrew his 
successor & 7 daughters who all married & left issue, two of these daughters 

Agnes Gray wife of Wm. Graham Earl of Men- Jean or Jane Gray wife of Sr. John 
teith and Airth and for a time Earl of Strathern Weems or Wemyss Earls of Sutherland 

David Weems Earl 
of Sutherland 

Lady Jane Weems first the wife 
of the Earl of Angus then wife 
of George Sutherland Earl of 

This Jane Lady Sutherland resident in Scotland & yet writes to Helen 
Lady Rawden as Heiress of the Graham Menteith family ; that she was that 
Lady Sutherland is proved by her lamentation for the death of her daughter 
Lady Arbuthnot, & the mention of her having taken the 7 children of her 
deceased daughter Lady Arbuthnot to her house. The letters of this Lady, 
show her to have been both a sensible and well-educated personage — there are 
also letters from the last Earl of Menteith and Airth to his niece, and from 
the Blackadder Family. Lady Christian sister to W™ (for a time Earl of 
Stratherne) Earl of Menteith & Airth was Aunt to S James Graham & 
Great Aunt to Lady Rawdon ; Lord Kinpont's connections by marriage are 
also to be considered — 

Sir James Graham John Ld. Kinpont 

2d. son murdered 1645 

Helen Graham William Graham 

Lady Rawdon last Earl of Menteith 

who died 1694 



William Keith — Lady Mary Erskine da. to John Earl of 
Earl Marischal Mar & the Lady Mary Stewart daughter 
of Esme Duke of Lennox 

Wm. Earl Marishal 
left 3 daughters only 
who married & left 

George Earl 
died in 1694 

John Keith 
Earl of 


Lady Jane 
wife of Alex. 
Forbes Lord 

Lady Mary 
wife of John 
Lord Kinpont 

William Earl 
Marischal died 

Eliz. Mary The last Earl 

Graham Graham of Menteith 

died Sep. 

It seems impossible that so numerous a kindred of such a high rank and 
station should be ignorant of the claims of their neices & that so far from the 
acknowledgement of the Rights of them & their descendants that their Cousin 
Germain their Father's youngest brother's daughter should be allowed to be 
the heiress ; some of these — Lady Jane or Jean Keith Lord Kintore's daughter 
was the wife of S' Forbes of Monimusk, and Lady Kinpont's sister the 
wife of Alexander Forbes Lord Pitsligo ; the sister of S' Arthur Rawdon, 
Mary Rawdon was then the wife of Arthur Forbes Lord Forbes eldest son of 
the Earl of Granard & thro' that connection S Arthur Rawdon must have 
learnt when his wife was addressed by part of the family as the Heiress of her 
Cousin Germain's prior Right had it existed. The various trifles belonging to 
the family esteemed as consequential appendages were transmitted to Helen 
Graham Lady Rawdon. Charles the 2 during his illness gave to the last Earl 
of Menteith the watch which belonged to his Father Charles the i^* which 
watch is now in the possession of the present Lord Moira. I was grieved at 
beholding it in my time modernized, the dial plate was of silver coarsely 
engraved with the hours and minutes ; the inward workmanship coarse & 
instead of a chain a piece of catgut was the material by which it was wound 
up, there was a clumsy Repeater in it distinct from the main work & the 
ribbon which was the same the King wore it with was brown brocaded with 
silver. It ought I thought to have remained in its first state as a sample of the 
progress of mechanism in that article. The Ring also was the gift of Charles 
the 2^ to the Earl of Menteith, it was a mourning one he had made for his 
Father's memory ; the enamel is bad. It represents King Charles the his 
Queen Henrietta of France & Charles the Second, the blue enamel on the 
back is marked by black enamel w^** a Death's Head and Crown, & the 
letters C.R. — a small enamelled miniature of Charles the 2^ in a Ring which I 
gave to Lord Moira was also a gift to Lord Menteith from that King. 

I have likewise in my possession the once Earl of Strathern's then the 
Earl of Menteith's wedding nightcap & his Countesse's Pin-Cushion, and 
some old Japan & China once belonging to her. It may be asked where- 
fore the claim of Helen Graham Lady Rawdon was not immediately stated 
& pursued. The answer is that S Arthur Rawdon died at the same time 
that Lord Menteith bid adieu to life, & that the great lawsuit was going on 
for the Conway property. Earl Conway had brought up & educated Sr. 
Arthur Rawdon when a third son, his Brothers dying he became head of the 



Family & Lord Conway declared that he should be his heir & made the 
marriage for him with the Heiress of Graham. When Earl Conway's will 
was divulged it appeared to be one which left nothing to his only nephew 
whom he had educated as his Heir, but that the property was bequeathed to 
the brother of his Lord Conway's wife. The consequence of this it was said 
caused Lord Menteith to leave also his property in the manner in which he 
did. Lady Rawdon sold as much of her fortune as was within her power to 
carry on the Conway lawsuit. The Scotch claim conveyed Honor, the 
Conway conveyed (if gained) profit, and the gratification of resentment, & 
Helen Graham Lady Rawdon was left a widow with an extensive lawsuit ta 
carry on, & thereby involved in narrow circumstances, as she supported it 
from her own income, had not the ability to exert herself for mere Honorary 
acquisitions however antient & desirable. 

She had only one son surviving — a sickly infant — whom she left a minor, 
and in a few years a second long minority took place — a state which is ever 
ruinous to the claims of a family & usually to their property is as destructive 
a course. 

Thro' the elapse of time, & omission of early claim, it is probable that 
these hereditary rights will hereafter remain solely as honorable pretentions, 
but as such the family should ever proudly bear them in remembrance. 

I have collected as many of the old letters as I could find from papers, 
esteemed in a later day rubbish ; but the w*^"^ from their having been 
docketed, appear to have been regarded formerly with a degree of respect. 

This Helen Graham is said to have been once on the point of marriage 
with the noted Lord Dundee at that period Laird of Claverhouse, a circum- 
stance that seems to announce that she had at that juncture a slain ^ ? 
prospect of some essential rights — she died 1709 having survived her 
husband S"^ Arthur above 1 5 years. She was a well educated & a learned 
woman, but superstitious in some respects (at least) to excess. Loving S'^ 
Arthur passionately she dreamt her husband appeared to her immediately 
after his death, & being convinced that it was an apparition not a dream she 
— during the remainder of her life — always had a person to sleep with her, 
& a woman servant who sat all night within the curtains of her bed holding 
her hand. 

In the same work of S"^ John Scot's at Scarvy, there is the best printed 
acc* I have met with (tho' short) of S'^ James Stewart the eldest son of Lord 
Blantyre, by oral tradition asserted to have had equal abilities to the 
admirable Crichton, & in moral character to have been much his superior. 
He was the first husband of Lady Dorothy Hastings (she became afterwards 
2'^ wife to Dillon Earl of Roscommon, but left no surviving issue by 

S' John Scot gives a concise account of the duel between S James Stewart 
& the eldest son of Lord Wharton in which both combatants fell . S"" James 
Stewart was a friend of the unfortunate & basely wronged & scandalously 
vilified Robert Car, Earl of Somerset. 


1 This word is an interlineation written very small, but under a magni- 
fying glass I can make nothing out of it but * slain ' — possibly * strong ' may 
have been intended. 


In another hand is the following note : — 

This Prayer Book belonged to Helen Graham Daughter & Heiress to S"^ 
James Graham K"* 2^ son of William Earl of Menteith & Airth who by the 
grant of Charles the first had ratified to him the title of Earl of Strathern the 
which title being again revoked, he was styled Earl of Airth & Menteith. 
There is a curious small book in Lord Moira's Library (the title) the 
* Staggering Statesman ' written by S*" John Scot of Scarvy — therein it is 
related that this William Earl of Menteith was banished to the Isles he 
possessed for having declared that he had the * reddest Blood in Scotland ' & 
one of the Earl's Law Counsellors (who is named in the course of the recital of 
this audacious declaration as having assisted him in the proof of it) was 
involved in punishment for so heinous a procedure. For the nature of the 
redness, or richness of his Blood, I refer to the work of George Crawford Esq"* 

[Note. — The above memoranda are of much interest, but afford a curious 
illustration of the beliefs held in families as to their * rights ' to peerage digni- 
ties, especially, perhaps, Scottish ones. For the claims to these earldoms and 
the work of Sir Harris Nicolas dealing with them have clearly shown that the 
sisters of the last earl left issue, though the writer here states that they * cer- 
tainly did not.' The descendants of Mary, wife of Sir John (not of George) 
Allardice, have more than once claimed the dignities, while William Graham, 
the heir of the other sister, not only assumed the earldom of Menteith, but 
actually voted in right of it from 1742 to 1761. 

It will be observed that the writer does not quote from the letters on 
which she relies. If they are now in the possession of Lord Moira's repre- 
sentatives their contents would be of interest and possibly of importance in 
case of a renewed claim to the honours. — J. H. R.] 




THE Tilliols were a family of distinction who lived at 
Scaleby, a manor on the north side of the river Eden 
about six miles from Carlisle, and took a prominent part in 
local affairs for more than three centuries. Scaleby Castle, the 
head of the manor, is one of the most interesting feudal sites 
in Cumberland, inasmuch as its history is written chapter by 
chapter in the architectural remains within its own precincts 
from the palisaded enclosure to the medieval fortress. Its 
proximity to the Border gave it an important strategic position 
for stopping the inroads of the Scots, and made it a defensive 
outpost of considerable consequence to the city of Carlisle. 
In the troublesome days of international feuds, the Tilliols 
were employed in many difficult operations against the 
hereditary enemy and it was little wonder that the family 
became conspicuous as a fighting race and displayed qualities 
which one would expect from the nature of their position and 
the employments on which they were engaged. Like several 
of the great magnates of the neighbourhood, they had a town 
house or residence within the strong walls of Carlisle either for 
the sake of safety in times of special danger or perhaps, as it is 
more likely, for their own convenience when in attendance on 
the curia comitatus or Court of the County. 

None of the name of Tilliol has left so permanent a 
record on the district in which he lived as the first of the 
family, Richard Ridere,^ or Richard the Knight as he was more 
usually called, who was enfeoffed with the manor by Henry I. 
The grant was made before 1130 when Richard the Knight 
accounted for 20s. for the farm of his own land. For some 
years before that date he held a confidential office under the 
Crown as the collector of the Noutgeld or tribute of catde, the 

1 Richard is surnamed Ridere only in the great inquest of 1 2 1 2 {Fictoria 
Hist. Cumberland, i. 422), It must be an early English form of miles, the 
knight, the equestrian, or the rider, and not a prophetic symptom of the 
name given to men who dwelt on the borders of the Debatable Land and were 
afterwards known as Border riders. Compare the High and Low Dutch 
ritte?' and ridder. 



Stanwix overlooking Carlisle. Though he witnessed charters 
as Richard the Knight,^ the name by which he was probably 

^ Pipe Roll, 31 Henry I. fF. 14 1-2, ed. Hunter. 

2 Inq. p.m. 31 Hen. III. No. 46. 

^ Bain, Calendar of Documents, ii. 1606 (11). 

* Round, Calendar of Documents in France,^. 221 ; Rotuli "Normannia, i. 337, 
ed. Hardy ; Charter Rolls, i John, p. 1 6b, ed. Hardy. 

^ Robert de Stutevill granted to Guy, a merchant and burgess of Carlisle, 
the messuage in Richard Street {in vico Ricardi) next to the * barony ' {baronid) 
of Peter de Tyllol in the same street, and John de Bothilton confirmed to the 
said merchant for life the same messuage next the land of the * barony ' of 
Symon de Tyllol. From another deed about the same property we learn that 
Richard Street was within the city walls i^eg. of Holmcultram, MS. fF. 28—30), 
and is now known as Scotch Street. St. Alban's Church abutted on Richard 
Street. There can be little doubt, as Denton suggested so long ago as 1 6 1 o, 
that * the gate, port and street in Carliell ' took its name from * Richard the 
Ryder,' the first ancestor of the Tilliols to settle in the district {Cumberland, p. 
155). It is worthy of observation, said Mr. Charles Brooke, Somerset Herald, 
that the magnates or tenants in capite in the reign of the Conqueror had most 
of them houses in the capital city or town of the county where their 
possessions lay, which we may conclude were town residences for them during 
the winter or to be near the curia comitatus. Of the twenty-four tenants in 
capite, mentioned in Domesday Book, twelve of them had houses in the city of 
York {Archceologia, vi. 48). Several of the county families of Cumberland had 
town houses in Carlisle, which they occupied on special occasions like 
assizes, quarter sessions, and parliamentary elections, up to a comparatively 
recent period. Rickerby or Ricardeby, which almost faces Rickergate on the 
opposite bank of the river, was held by the Tilliols of the prior of Carlisle for 
one mark yearly {Inq. p.m. 31 Hen. III. No. 46), and at a later period from 
the Bishop of Carlisle when that property was allotted to the See. 


our county families and know little of what took place between 
the cession of the district to David I., and its recovery in 1 157 
by Henry II. It would be mere conjecture to say that there 
was or was not a displacement of Crown tenants during that 
period. David's court at Carlisle swarmed with Scotsmen of 
the name of Brus, Morvill, Heriz, SumerviU, and Lindesay, 
some of whom at that time held lands in Cumberland. It is 
rarely that we meet with the old names of the Norman settle- 
ment in attendance on him, except in cases where they were of 
Scottish descent, like Waldeve and Alan, or the sons of Suan.^ 
It is very suspicious, as far as the Tilliols are concerned, that 
in the year when the county was recovered, Peter de Tilliol 
obtained possession of the land of his grandfather and was 
debited in 1158 with a sum of 50J. owing to the Crown for 
his admission thereto.^ There seems to be only one inference 
from this circumstance, that his father, whose name has not 
been revealed, was never in possession of Scaleby and that the 
sheriff depended on the title of Richard the Knight and the 
claimant's relationship to him as the lawful heir, as - his 
authority for giving him seizin. Henry II. gave him Holm 
Werri, now variously called Weary, Willow, or Willy Holm,^ out- 
side the city of Carlisle south of the Eden opposite Etardby, at 
an annual rent of 20J., but the property did not remain 
long in possession of the family. 

Simon de Tilliol, son of the aforementioned Peter, was the 
next owner of the manor and succeeded his father in 11 83* 
He confirmed to the priory of Lanercost certain land in Scaleby 
which his father gave, and added as his own gift several acres 
within the same manor.^ In 1201 he paid a fine of looj. that 

1 One charter only may be cited in illustration ; whereby David, King ot 
Scots, sent greeting to all his approved men of Coupland and confirmed the 
alms which Maud, wife of Godard, gave to the priory of St. Bees. The 
charter was witnessed at Lamplou, now Lamplugh, in the western part of the 
county, by Walter the Chancellor, Robert de Brus, Hugh de Morvill, Adam 
son of Swen, William Sumervill, Alan son of Waldef, Henry son of Swan, 
William de Heriz, Gospatric son of Orm, Ranulf de Lindesey, and Durand the 
Knight {Reg. of St. Bees, M.S. i. 16.) 

2 Pipe Roll, 4 Hen. II. 

^ There seems little doubt that Holm Werri or Weary Holm took its name 
from Guerus or Werricus, a Fleming, who held land and houses in Carlisle 
before 1 1 30 {Pipe Roll, p. 142). Richard son of Werricus was amerced for a 
false claim in 1198 (ibid. 9 Ric. I.) 

* Pipe Roll, 29 Hen. II. ^ Reg. of Lanercost, MS. vi. 4. 


he might not be compelled to serve abroad, but he must 
have died soon after, as his land was in the hands of the 
sheriff in the following year/ Geoffrey de Lucy had custody 
of Peter his son and heir with his widow and lands in 1204, 
and paid a fine of 20 marks and one palfrey for having the 
marriage of the widow with her assent and that of her 
friends.^ The heir was still a minor in 12 12 and in ward of 
Geoffrey de Lucy, and his lands, consisting of one vill, were 
valued at ;^I5 a year.^ 

Peter de Tilliol succeeded his father when he came of age. 
He was on the king's service with his former guardian, 
Geoffrey de Lucy, in the Isle of Wight {in Insula) in 1225,* 
but he must have returned to the north within a year or two, 
for in 1227 he had a plea in the courts with his neighbour, 
Richard de Levinton, about the bounds of the adjoining manors 
of Scaleby and Kirklinton, a quarrel which seems to have arisen 
over the diversion of a watercourse.^ This member of the 
family, who was often employed in the public affairs of the 
county,® died in 1246, when Mary his wife gave security that 
she should not marry without the king's leave, and had a 
dower assigned her out of her late husband's lands. In the 
* extent ' of his lands made on December 5, 1246, under writ 
dated on the previous November 18, the jurors stated that 
in the demesne of Scaleby there were 233 acres of arable 
land, each acre worth 7^. yearly, 20 acres of meadow each 
worth i2d.^ and a mill worth 7 marks ; also 4 acres of 
arable land and i acre of meadow in demesne, worth 55., 
which David the singer and Gilbert son of Beatrice held. 
There were in the manor 20 bondmen and 6 cottars. Various 
freeholders were in possession of Etardby, Houghton, 
Ricardby, and the house, with curtilages, in the suburb of 
Carlisle. The total issues of the estates in demesnes, homages 
and rents were valued at ;^2 8 lOJ. 9^. yearly. The verdict of 
the inquest was that the heir of the said Peter de TiUiol, 
Geoffrey by name, was sixteen years of age in the first week 
of Lent in the 30th year of the king's reign. Concerning his 

^ Pipe Rolls, 3 & 4 John. 

^ Ibid. 6 John ; Rotuli de Oblatis et Finibus, p. 201, ed. Hardy. 
^ Victoria Hist. Cumberland, i. 422, 425. 
^ Pat. Roll, 9 Hen. III. m. 4. 
^ Bain, Calendar, i, 971. 

^ Pat. Roll, 20 Hen. III. m. id. ; Bain, Calendar, i. 1289, 1296. 



marriage the jurors had known nothing at that time as the heir 
was lying ill at Cambridge and it was said that his . . . was 
broken/ Geoffrey was delivered to the wardship of Robert de 
Acre till he came of age.^ 

Geoffrey de Tilliol lived the quiet life of a country gentle- 
man and took little part in public affairs. In 1261 William 
son of Robert arraigned an assize of novel disseisin against 
him and Robert de Tilliol for common of pasture in Scaleby, 
and in 1266 he and the said Robert had a safe conduct to come 
to the king's court about their business.^ Geoffrey was the 
lessee of a farm in Torpenhow, belonging to John de Kirkpatrick 
and Margery his wife, of the heritage of Richard le Brun. In 
1292 the farm in Geoffrey's hands was distrained at the assizes 
of Carlisle, as John lived in Scotland and had no other property 
in the county/ Though it was certified that he held the 
manor of Scaleby and the barony of Houghton of the king by 
cornage, he was allowed a respite of becoming a knight in 
1278/ On his death in 1295 jurors found that Robert 
was the son and heir and thirty years of age/ 

Robert de Tilliol succeeded to the property in 1295^ on 
the eve of the great rupture between the two kingdoms which 
spread havoc and devastation throughout the northern counties 
and which lasted with little cessation till the union of the 
Crowns three centuries later. In a short time John Balliol 
revolted and Edward 1. took the field. For many years 
Robert de Tilliol, then in the prime of life, was actively 
employed in the king's service raising levies, summoning 
knights and enforcing musters for the army against Scotland.^ 
In 1299, when affairs on the Border were looking dark and 

^ Inq. p.m. 30 Hen. III. No. 46; Calend. Geneal. i. 18. It is very- 
disappointing that the record is deficient at the critical word, as we should 
have liked to know whether the young Tilliol had met with his accident among 
* the flannelled fools at the wicket ' or * the muddy oafs at the goal ' ! 
Cambridge was fully equipped as an educational institution at this period. Mr. 
Gladstone has told us that * it is first in the year 1209 that a trustworthy 
notice of it is found' {Romanes Lecture, 1892, p. 14). 

^ Fine Rolls, ii. 1 8, ed. Hardy. 

^ Bain, i. 2249, 2398. 

* Ibid. ii. 645. 

^ Close Roll, 6 Edw. I. m. 13 ; Bain, ii. 146, p. 37. 
^ Inq. p.m. 23 Edw. I. No. 10 ; Cal. Geneal. ii. 495. 

Originalia, 23 Edw. I. m. 7. 
^ VdXgxdiVt, Parliamentary Writs, i. 325-6 et passim. 


menacing, he was ordered to raise 2,000 tootmen in Cum- 
berland, and Hugh de Multon had a similar command to raise 
1,500 footmen in Westmorland 'to repress the increasing 
malice of the Scots/ In the following year when King 
Edward arrived on the scene on his way to Carlaverock, he 
joined him in a commission with Sir John of Wigton to raise 
2,000 men in Cumberland for that expedition/ Rural life in 
some parts of the county at that period may have been 
interesting, but in the district north of the Eden it was 
decidedly dangerous. The old defences at Scaleby were not 
strong enough to protect its redoubtable owner. A man 
occupying his conspicuous military position could not help but 
be a mark for Scottish vengeance as often as the opportunity 
presented itself. His manor-house lay close to the frontier. 
The great Edward had breathed his last at Burgh-by-Sands 
and the Border magnates were soon left to shift for their own 
safety. As Tilliol could not wait, he was one of the first to 
apply for and to obtain licence to crenellate his mansion of 
Scaleby in the marches of Scotland.^ From the year 1307 the 
manor-house had become entitled to be called Scaleby Castle. 
The busy soldier, however, had found time to increase his 
possessions in his own neighbourhood. In 1304 he purchased 
without the King's leave a messuage, 14 acres of land, and a 
sixth part of the manor of Kirklinton from Patrick Trompe, a 
tenant in chief, which got him into trouble and of which 
he was disseised, but as it was found after inquisition that 
the King was in no way injured by the transaction, and as 
Robert had done the state some service in Scotland, he was 
pardoned and confirmed in the purchase.^ Robert de Tilliol 
was fortunate enough to win the appreciation of his country- 
men as well as the recognition of his sovereign, for he was 
elected a knight of the shire to serve in the parliaments of 

1 Pat. Rolls, 27 Edw. I. m. 1 1, 28 Edw. I. m. 16 : Fadera, i. 915. Robert 
was beleaguered in the Castle of Lochmaben in 1301, when his position was 
hazardous. He appealed to the king for more troops for Sir John Soulis and 
Sir Ingram de Umframville, at the head of four banerets, twelve score men- 
at-arms and 7,000 footmen or more, ' burnt for us our town and assailed 
our peel from the middle of prime until the hour of nones,' but by the help 
of God he was not afraid of them (Stevenson, Z)o^«»z^«/j, ii. 432-3). See also 
Letters from the 'Northern Re^sters, pp. 246-7. 

^ Pat. Roll, I Edw. II. pt. i. m. 18. 

2 Inq. ad q. d. 32 Edw. I. No. 113 ; Cal Geneal. ii. 671 ; Bain, Calendar 
of Documents, ii. 1609. 




1 301 and 1315/ and Edward II. not only granted him the 
privilege of free warren in his manor of Scaleby in 1307, but 
also committed to him during pleasure in 13 13 the lands of 
Walter de Corry, a rebel Scotsman, in Kirklinton and 
Kirkandrews.^ A large property in Yorkshire came to the 
family by Robert's marriage with Maud second daughter and 
coheiress of Roger and Isabel de Lauceles of Ellerton in 
that county.^ His lands were taken into the king's hand 
after his death in 1321 till the heir was declared.* The widow 
survived till 1344.^ 

Peter or Piers de Tilliol, the eldest son and heir, was of the 
age of twenty-two at his father's death. The son like his father 
was an active agent in Border affairs, serving on many com- 
missions of both peace and war with the Scots. Immediately 
after succeeding to the estates he was chosen knight of the 
shire in 1322, and was returned by the sheriff in 1324 to 
attend a great council of the realm. In the latter year he was 
nominated one of the commissioners with power to select and 
array the knights of the county required for military service in 
Gascony, and in 1326 he was commanded to certify the names 
of persons in Cumberland eligible for the degree of knight- 
hood.^ Owing to his position as a Border chieftain, he was 
mixed up in the multitudinous quarrels and disputes of the 
March laws. In 1333 he was commissioned to make strict 
inquiry into the abduction of Sir Roger de Kirkpatrick, a 
knight of Scotland, who had fled to England to save his life,"^ 
and in 1337 he was joined with others in finding out, by juries 
of the men of the shires of Roxburgh and Dumfries, the 
names of people in Eskdale, Liddesdale, and other places who 
were suspected of assisting the enemy.^ With Hugh de 
Moriceby, he raised 100 hobelars in 1337 for the Border 
service, and in 1340 he was joined with Thomas Wake, lord 
of Liddel, and Antony de Lucy to put down thieving within 

1 Palgrave, Pan. Writs, ii. pt. ii. 141, 150; Parliaments of England, i. 13, 
48, Blue Book. 

^ Charter Roll, i Edw. II. pt. i. m. 33 ; Originalia, 6 Edw. II. m. 16 ; 
Inq. ad. q. d. 6 Edw. II. No. 43 ; Pat. Roll, 10 Edw. II. pt. i. m. 24. 
^ Close Rolls, 16 Edw. II. m. 23, 17 Edw. II. m. 33. 
* Inq. p.m. 14 Edw. II. No. 42 ; Originalia, 14 Edw. II. m. 7. 
^ Ibid. 17 Edw. III. No. 34 ; Originalia, 17 Edw. III. m. 12. 
^ Parliamentai-y Writs, ii. pt. ii. 258, 650, 682, 736, 739. 

Pat. Roll, 7 Edw. III. pt. i. m. 25^. 
^ Ibid. II Edw. III. pt. I. m. 33^/; Faedera, ii. 960. 


their commission/ This member of the family acted as sheriff 
for some years after 1326 and was summoned to ParHament 
no less than eleven times between the years 1322 and 1348.^ 

It would be futile to attempt an enumeration of the 
services which Peter de Tilliol had rendered to his country 
during his comparatively short life. Some indication of their 
nature and variety has been already given. But two other 
events in which he had borne a part may be mentioned, as they 
caused no small stir in the neighbourhood of Carlisle and may 
be said to possess some points of interest at the present time. 
The citizens of Carlisle were becoming restive at this date and 
were manifesting an inclination to press their chartered liberties 
beyond legitimate bounds. In 1341 William de Bohun, Earl 
of Northampton and Constable of England, complained that 
his men of Annandale, coming as of old by the Solway to sell 
their goods at the fairs and markets of the city, were hindered 
and unduly taxed by John de Stretford, keeper of the Solway, 
to their great loss and damage, a complaint which Peter de 
Tilliol was instructed to inquire into and redress.^ But 
matters of graver moment arose in 1345, when the citizens 
were eager tor the exercise of an inordinate slice of local self- 
government. Complaint was made to the king that the mayor 
and bailiffs, usurping the royal warrant, had sentenced certain 
persons for sedition in the city to be drawn and hanged, and 
actually carried out the sentence, whereas the Scotsmen impli- 
cated in the same disturbances were harboured and maintained 
by them. But a more serious indiscretion had been com- 
mitted, inasmuch as Peter de Tilliol, the most eminent of the 
citizens, with the mayor, the bailiffs, the Scots, and the 
commonalty, tumultuously attacked the castle, entering the 
outer ward, besieging it in warlike fashion, wounding many 
of the garrison with arrows and darts, and endeavouring to 
seize the castle, till at last they were driven out helter- 
skelter by the bishop and the king's men. It was a famous 
row to be made, as the record says, ' on pretence of an old 
grant to the city by one of the king's progenitors.' The 
citizens evidently had an exaggerated opinion ot their own 
importance. They also claimed on this occasion to appropriate 

^ Close Roily 1 1 Edw. III. pt. i. m. 9 ; Pat. Roll, 14 Edw. III. pt. ii. m. ^zd. 
^ List of Sheriffs, p. 26, Rolls series ; Parliaments of England, i. 64, 80, 85,91, 
etc., Blue Book. 

^ Bain, Calendar of Documents, iii. 1372. 



from the wastes in the city a ' long street ' in the king's high- 
way, to build on the foss of the castle, thus touching the 
king's prerogative, and to be owners of two parts of the solum 
of the castle, and many other such enormities/ Though 
Tilliol must have regretted the escapade, his misdemeanour 
cannot have been viewed seriously in high quarters, for in the 
following year he was included in a commission to punish 
evil doers who broke out of the bounds of Cumberland and 
plundered the vill of Blamyre in the barony of Kirkandrews 
in Scotland, carrying off the goods of the king's lieges there.^ 
He died on October 30, 1349, and Robert his son and heir, 
being of full age, reigned in his stead.^ 

Sir Robert Tilliol succeeded to the belligerent tempera- 
ment of his father as well as to the family estates. Though 
he was often employed in the king's service both as escheator 
in the northern counties and as sheriff of Cumberland for 
several years,* it seemed more to his taste to be harrassing the 
enemy at every opportunity. The Scots called him TuylliyoU. 
In 1357 he accomplished some very successful expeditions, or 
^ drives ' as we should call them according to the nomen- 
clature of modern warfare. In company with Sir Thomas de 
Lucy, the great lord of Cockermouth, he forayed the lands of 
William, lord of Douglas, in Eskdale with a great force raised 
in the two counties, and robbed the poor people there in open 
day of 1,000 oxen, cows, and other young beasts, 1,000 sheep 
and horses, and plundered all the houses. It was complained 
that Lucy lay in ambush and seized the people who tried to 
rescue their goods. The crime was bad enough when com- 
mitted in time of war, but the raiders, starting from Loch- 
maben Casde, which was nothing but a den af thieves, ravaged 
the land in open day with banners displayed in time of truce, 
and had set to ransom many of the people to their damage of 
;^5,ooo sterling.^ There is little doubt that the authorities 
looked through their fingers at TiUiol's depredations in 
Eskdale. In the next year, on the unrepentant culprit's 
application, the king made him a grant for life of the herbage 

^ Bain, Calendar of Documents, iii. 1448. 

2 Close Roll, 20 Edw. III. pt. i. m. 15^2'. 

3 Inq. p.m. 23 Edw. III. pt. i. No. 51. 

* Originalia, 30 Edw. III. m. 5 ; List of Sheriffs, p. 26. About this time 
the conjunctive particle * de ' began to be omitted from the family name. 
^ Bain, Calendar of Documents, iii. 1664. 


of Morton and Mortonscough in the forest of Inglewood. Sir 
Robert was chosen knight ot the shire ^ six times at various 
dates between 1352 and 1365 and died at Ireby between 
cock-crowing and dawn on April 6, 1367. His will was 
proved at Rose Castle on April 16 following.^ He 
bequeathed all his goods to his wife Felice and to his 
children ; his body he wished to be buried in the church of 
the Friar Preachers in Carlisle. From a deed drawn up by 
his executors two months later, we learn that all his lands and 
tenements in Ireby, except the site of the manor within the 
water ditches, the park of Torpenhow, and other tenements 
in Newbiggin, were bequeathed to Felice for life with re- 
mainder to Peter his eldest son and heir, and that his other 
sons Geoffrey and Roger were also provided for.^ Peter the 
heir was only eleven years of age and became a ward of the 
Crown. The widow survived her husband only two years.* 

When Peter de Tilliol came of age he was chosen knight 
of the shire of Cumberland in 1378 and served in Parliament 
from time to time from that date till 1426.^ Meanwhile he 
filled the office of sheriff three times ^ and often acted as 
escheator for Cumberland and Northumberland.^ His avoca- 
tions were more peaceful than those of many of his ancestors. 
It is only now and then that we meet with him in connection 
with Border troubles. As sheriff, in 1387, he was obliged to 
levy fines for March offences, and in 1390, having failed in his 
capacity as escheator to report the traitors who were supplying 
grain to the Scots, he was attached by the officers of the 
Exchequer, but he was pardoned in making oath in the king's 
presence that the mandatory letters never reached him.^ In 
1398 he was appointed with his brother Geoffrey among the 
arbitrators to determine international disputes.^ As a justice 
of the peace he administered the law with becoming clemency, 
though on several occasions those who failed to pay Sir Peter 

^ Parliaments of England, i. 150, 159, 161, etc. 

^ Testamenta Karleolensia, p. 82, ed. R. S. Ferguson. 

^ Catalogue of Ancient Deeds, iii. 444—5. 

* Inq. p.m. 41 Edw. III. pt. i. No. 58 ; 43 Edw. III. pt. ii. No. 31. 

5 Parliaments of England, i. 199, 206, 241, 255, etc. 

® List of Sheriffs, p. 27 ; Pat. Roll, 1 1 Ric. II. pt. ii. m. 30. 

Pat. Rolls, 10 Ric. II. pt. ii. m. I3<3', 11 Ric. II. pt. ii. m. 34. 
® Ibid. 1 1 Ric. II. pt. ii. m. 30 ; Close Roll, 14 Ric. II. m. 9^. 
^ Feedera, viii. 58, old edition. 



the debts due to him got into serious trouble/ As the 
citizens of Carlisle, always pugnacious in their relations with 
the county, in which encounters they usually came out in the 
second place, were grievously injured in 1427 by certain 
' malefactors ' who broke the banks of their watercourse at 
Blackball and diverted the stream so that ' le Castelmylne ' 
could not grind and the king could not get his rent owing to 
the depreciation in its value,^ Tilliol was commissioned with 
other knights of the county to hold an inquest on the dispute 
and report on its merits to the Crown. Sir Peter Tilliol 
died on Sunday, January 2, 1435, ^^^^^ having enjoyed the 
estates, if we include the time of his minority, for the long 
period of sixty-seven years. It was declared by the inquest 
after his death, taken in the following May at Penrith, that 
Robert his first begotten son was the heir of all his manors and 
thirty years of age and more, but that the said Robert was an 
incurable lunatic (qui quidem Robertus omnimodo est fatuus ideotus 
et fatuetate detentus^f Thus ended one of the proudest of our 
Cumbrian houses, a family which had rendered conspicuous 
service to the county for three centuries, occupying prominent 
positions in time of peace and performing brave deeds in time 
of war. 

Robert the last male heir of the family did not long 
survive his father, for he died on Thursday before Martinmas 
in the same year, leaving his two sisters as his heirs, viz. 
Isabel, wife of John Col veil, thirty years of age, and 
Margaret wife of Christopher Moresby, twenty-six years of 
age.* The great Tilliol property, which consisted of over ten 
manors in Cumberland, was not divided for over a century 
after Sir Peter's death, the two daughters and their heirs 
holding it in moiety.^ On the death of Isabel Colvell's son 

^ Pat. Rolls, 12 Ric. 11. pt. i. m. 36 ; 3 Hen. VI. pt. i. m. 20 ; 6 Hen. 
VI. pt. i. m. 26. Peter Tilliole was put in the commission of the peace in 
1380 {Pat. Roll, 3 Ric. II. pt. iii. m. 13^/.) 

2 Pat. Roll, 5 Hen. VI. pt. i. m. 14^. 

3 Inq. p.m. 1 3 Hen. VI. No. 24. 

4 Ibid. 14 Hen. VI. No. 23. 

^ Isabel Col veil died possessed of half the Tilliol estates in 1438 {Inq. 
t.m. 17 Hen. VI. No. 37). William Colvell her son and heir died in 1479 
(ibid. 19 Edw. IV. No. 59). Margaret Moresby, late the wife of Thomas de 
Crakanthorpe, died in possession of the other half in 1458 (ibid. 37 Hen. VI. 
No. 30), her first husband Christopher Moresby having predeceased her in 
1442 (ibid. 21 Hen. VI. No. 61.) Their son Christopher Moresby, who 


William, which took place in 1479, her portion passed to the 
Musgraves by marriage with the heiress of the Colvells, and 
Margaret Moresby's moiety having been held for two descents 
passed in a similar manner to the Pickerings and then to the 

William Gilpin, recorder of Carlisle and owner ot the 
manor of Scaleby, who died in 1724, has related a remarkable 
story of attempted fraud in relation to the Tilliol property 
which is deserving of mention by reason of its apparent 
authenticity. It is said that after the death of William 
Colvell in 1479, Robert his brother pretended a title to the 
estates of his grandfather. Sir Peter Tilliol, alleging that he 
had made a will by which he devised that William Colvell his 
grandson should change his name to Tilliol and have the 
manors of Houghton, Rickerby, Ireby, Solport, a moiety of 
Newbiggin, and a third part of Kirklinton, together with the 
castle of Scaleby, to him and to his heirs male, with remainder 
to Robert, the second son of Isabel his elder daughter, in 
like manner and upon the same condition that he should 
assume the name of Tilliol. But Robert, though he had 
complied with the conditions of the will, never succeeded in 
getting possession of the estates. ' There is yet extant,' said 
Mr. Gilpin 'an authentic instrument under the seal of the 
Commissary General of York, dated September 27, 148 1 
(which I have in my custody), which testifies that one William 
Martindale, Knt., did in the court of York for the discharging 
of his conscience swear that he saw the will and that it pur 
ported an entail as aforesaid, and that he and others in the 
favour of Margaret, second daughter of the said Peter de 
Tilliol, had destroyed it.' ^ It may be noted that Gilpin had a 
personal interest in the truth or falsehood of the story of the 
will, for it was from Sir Edward Musgrave that his father 
purchased Scaleby Castle a portion of the Colvell moiety of 
the Tilliol estates. 

held his mother's moiety, died in 1461 (ibid, i Edw. IV. No. 35). In the 
rentals of the bishops of Carlisle, from whom the reputed manor of Rickerby was 
held, the succession of Robert Tilliol, or * Robert the fool ' as J. Denton 
called him {Cumberland, p. 154), was not recognized, inasmuch as the 
*heredes Petri Tilliol chivaler' continued to account to the bishops for rent 
and service till the close of the fifteenth century. 
^ John Denton, Cumberland, p. 154. 



Richard Ridere or Richard 
the Knight, enfeoffed before 
1130 = 

Peter de Tilliol, succeeded 
his grandfather in 11 57 and 
died in 11 83 

Simon de Tiiliol, died in 
1201 = 

Peter de Tilliol = Mary [de Lucy] 
died in 1246 I 

Geoffrey de Tilliol 
died in 1295 = 

[Adam de Tilliol married 
a daughter of Henry 

Robert de Tilliol = Maude de Lauceles 
died in 1321 | died in 1344 

Peter de Tilliol = [Isabel] 
died in 1349 

[Elizabeth wife of 
Anthony de Lucy] 

Robert de Tilliol = Felice 

died in 1367 I died in 1369 

Peter de Tilliol = [. . . dau. of Robert 
died in 1435 I Mulcaster of Hayton] 

de Tilliol 

Robert de Tilliol 
died in 1435 ^'P' 

John Colvell = Isabel, died 
I in 1438 

William Colvell 

de Tilliol 

Christopher = Margaret = Thomas 
Moresby | died in 1458 Crakan- 
I thorp 
Christopher Moresby 

In the roll of fourteenth century arms 
called Jenyns's Ordinary (of which a 
copy exists in the Cotton MS. Tiberius 
E. ix.) the arms of Monsire Piers 
TyllioU are recorded as de goules a une 
eon rampant dar gent et une baston dazure 



THE northern counties are exceptionally well served by 
their archaeological societies. The Surtees Society in 
particular is one of the best in England, as it is one of the 
earliest. Two of its latest volumes, issued this year, deal with 
wills, a subject of the greatest interest to all genealogical 

A will is such an intensely human document that its value, 
apart from mere questions of pedigree, cannot be overestimated. 
We find a testator dealing in his last moments with the final 
distribution of his property, we learn who are his favourite 
children, what are his most treasured belongings, his plate and 
jewels, his clothes, his horses and dogs. It is to be regretted 
that the attention of publishing societies is not more directed 
to this class of document. 

The Surtees Society has already done a great deal in this 
direction. The first of the volumes alluded to is a collection 
of wills and administrations enrolled in the records of the 
Manor of Knaresborough, and is edited by Dr. Collins, who 
has done so much to earn the gratitude of the northern 
genealogist. It contains full abstracts of all enrolled wills^ 
grants of administration and of tuition, from 2 Henry VIIL 
to 3 and 4 James I., ' no matter how insignificant in life the 
testator may have been or how uninteresting the will * 

There is a fair sprinkling of Visitation families, but the 
bulk of the wills are those of yeomen, farmers, tradesmen and 
the like. This exhaustive plan opens out quite a new field ; 
we see not only the castle, the hall and the manor-house, but 
we are introduced to the farm, the shop and the cottage as well. 

One of the most interesting wills in this volume is that of 
Sir William Ingilby of Ripley Castle and Padsidehead, 1578 ; 
this is accompanied by a very complete inventory, from which 
a few extracts may be made. Let us take first the bill for the 
funeral expenses. 

Imprimus, in blacks for murning gownes and cottes, iiij'"' xvj//. ; to the 
paynter for armes and other suche like, xvj/i. ; his mortuarie, xxs. ; his heriott. 



xb. ; charges to the poore in redie money, viijV/. ; charges of the funerall 
dinner, xiijVi. vj;. viij^/. Probacion of the testament, regestring, and the 
obligacion, xijV. Sum, cxxxvjVif. viy. viijV. 

Next the plate. Sir William kept in a chest 

in his owne bedd chambre three pounced peces ot silver, with one cover, a 
bolle of silver with a cover parcele gylte, two silver cuppes double gilte with 
covers, a dussan silver spones with thappels upon the endes, five gylted spones, 
x new silver spones, 

valued at £1,2 Besides this there were in the buttery 

* seaven silver tunnels, eight silver spones, and one silver salt 
duble gilte with a cover,' valued fy. 

His owne apparell — one velvett gowne, v/i. ; one long damaske gowne, xh. ; 
one long chamlett gowne, xiij;. iiijV. ; one long cloth gowne, xs. ; one long 
blacke frese gowne, v'y. viijV. ; a blacke cloth coote, a black frese coote, a blacke 
frese jerking, and a blacke spanishe jerkinge, xxs. ; a sattan dublet, xxf. ; two 
paire of blacke hoose, a paire of frese sloppes, and fower \ynne shirtes, xiij;. 
iiijV. ; two felt hattes, one velvett capp, and one litle round cloth capp, xiijj. 
iiij^/. ; thre paire of bootes, a paire of spurres, two paire of shoes, two sadles 
and two bridles, xxs. ; his girdle, sword and dagger, xiijj. iiijV. ; his purse and 
money in it, xx/i. 

In his own bedchamber were two stand-beds, one having 
a ' teaster of blew and yallow velvett ' and ' thre hanginges 
of grene saie ' ; the other had a ' teaster of redd and yallow 
saie.' Other beds in the house are mentioned. One had 
a ' teaster with the honginges of red saie ' ; another in the 
chambre over my ladies chambre ') had a ' teaster of blacke 
and yallow damaske, and two hanginges of redd and yallow 
saie.' Total of inventory, ^£700 i 8j. 

The references to pre-Reformation affairs are neither 
numerous nor important. Thomas Benson, 151 1, leaves 
^ unam vaccam capitatam albam ad fabricacionem le Roode 
lofte ' ; Miles Gill, 1512, bequeathes 'unto th' abbot and 
convente of Fontaunce for to be assoUed of harmes agaynes 
thaym doon iji.' 

We should perhaps hardly expect, so late as 1591, to find 
Richard Burnand of Knaresborough, esquire, directing, — 

First, I geue and bequeith my soulle unto the handes and mercye of my 
Saviour and Redemer Jesus Christe, most hartelye prainge our blissid mother 
Marye and all the holye company of heaven to praye unto Him that He will 
forgeue me, before I departe this transsitorye lyef, my innumerable synnes 
commytted against Him. 


Of funeral directions the following from the same will is 
the best example : — 

Item, I will thatt within one holle yeare after my departure, two holle 
large and stronge brasse pictures be maid, resemblinge my brother Fraunces 
stature and myne, and thatt the same pictures, soe beinge maide and ingraven, 
be faste wrought into and nailed above the marble stone where my brother 
lyeth, with a subscribtion written under therein, likewise in brasse, declaringe 
our names and parentes, and parentes by father and mother, and thatt we 
bothe died unmaried, beinge the laste males of the full bloode of that name. 

Thomas Lightfoot, 1559, directs that ' everie persone 
beinge att the daye off my buriall shall have one farthing 
loyff' (loaf); John Sporett, 1559, 'I will that my neybors 
shall have breyde and aill att the daye of my buriall ' ; 
Christopher Bank, 1566 — 

I will that my neighbours shall have a dynner at Fuiston the day of my 
buriall, and the powre people to be served the daye of my buriall at the dis- 
crecion of my supervisors, as they shall thinke good ; 

John Thorpe, 1571 — 

I will that ther be halpeny dole delt for me at my parishe churche at Fuiston, 
and that all honest folkes that gooes to y^ churche with me have ther dinners. 

Perhaps we may add here an extract showing that ' ances- 
tors ' were not confined to the landed gentry : Edward Spence 
of Fewston, laborer, directs that he shall be buried ' in the 
church yeard there emongst my auncestors.' 

The kindly charity of Robert Turner ( 1 5 5 1 ) deserves a 
note. He bequeaths — 

to Thomas Thorpe, my nevey, all my lether and all maner of stuiF belonging 
to the occupacion within my shoppe. Allso, I will he make thirteyn pair 
of shoys, which shalbe geven to thirteyn pooer folkes within the paryshe of 

Richard Burnand's will, already quoted, contains some 
further items of interest : — 

I geue unto my lovinge cossynes and faithfull freindes, for soe in my lief 
time I have alweis founde theim, Sir Richard Mauleverer of Allerton Male- 
verer. Knight, Richard Hudson, Doctor of the Lawe, Richard Goodriche of 
Ribston, esquier, everye one of theim an ounce of golde a pece, to maike 
theim rynges, beinge engraven withe theire armes and myne togither, upon 
two severall scutchions, well hopynge of there faithefull love and favors to- 
wardes those who shall succede me. 

Item, I geue unto my frend, Mr. Edward Wythes, the picture I promised 
him yf I died before him, and unto his wief I geve an other picture, which 
ys maid like unto the other, savinge they dyffer in personages. 


Item, I geue to my cossyn Dynnys Baynebrigge and his wief, two sylver 
goblettes, worthe in valewe xls. a pece, with my armes and name upon theim, 
and they to have the use of theim duringe theire lyves ; and after theire 
deceases, I geve the same goblettes unto Anne Faux and Elizabethe Faux. 

Mrs. Bainbrigg was the widow of Edward Fa^kes of 
York, and mother of the celebrated Guy ; Anne and Eliza- 
beth were her daughters. 

Guy himself was not forgotten : — 

Item, I geue unto Guy Faux awo angells, to maike him a rynge. 

Richard Barroby of Pannal (1539) thus quaintly records 
his dissatisfaction with his sons : — 

And in casse my ij sonnes John and Henrye doo demande or clame anye 
parte of my goodes in the name of their childes portions, I wuU yem noo 
parte of my goodes, by reasone I had greate charges off theym bothe, fyndynge 
theym att scolle, and afterwords I dyd lowsse John my sonne furthe his 
apprentyschyppe, which was no lytill coste ; as for Henrye, I dyd lene (loan) 
hym xxvjj. viija'. which he never payd me agayne, though te y* he saithe he 
paied me. 

He bequeaths all his goods to his daughter Janet. 

John Yeadon of Killinghall (1590) is equally outspoken. 
He gives the residue of his goods to four friends — 

only upon trust that whereas I have a brother called John Yeadon, and a nece 
called Dorotie, his daughter, and whereas my sayd brother is a lame man and 
soone distempered, and so unfytt eyther to governe himselfe or anything I 
shall gyve him, 

the trustees are to provide for them at their discretion. This 
affords a late example of the singularly inconvenient custom 
of christening two brothers by the same Christian name. 
Henry Shaw of Clint, clerk (1595) bequeaths 

his short gowne and a typpytt ot black silke which he had lent to Tho. 
Atkinson for iij dayes to ride on woweinge with. 

Let us hope that the lady of Mr. Atkinson's choice was duly 
impressed by his borrowed plumes, and that the ' woweinge * 
was brought to a satisfactory ending. 

Here is a charming touch of favouritism : — 

And the reste remaynynge [of my goods] I geue unto my doughter 
Dorothye. I geve to my said children sex silver spones, to everye of them 
two, but Dorothye to have two of the beste. 

Mrs. Katherine Roundell of Scriven (1522) boldly asserts : 

I awe no dettes to no man y^ I knawe of, bot xc^. to Wylliam Dakar, nor 
none is awynge to me. 


Some bequests read very strangely : — 

I give, if God send my doughter a childe and a christen soule, vjs. viijV. 
(William Shutt, 1579). 

I give to my sonn Thomas, half a mare and halt a sadle, and a cart whele 
(John Bates, 1580). 

To my doughter Elizabethe the greateste ketle, soe that she paye everie ot 
her children iijs. iiijV. (Joan Lodge, 1591). 

I will that if anye person or persons shall nott be contente with such gyftes 
as given to them by vertue of this my will and testament, shall be clearlie and 
utterlie voyded out of the same, and they shall haue no comodytie or profyte 
by vertue of the same (George Spence, 1587). 

A most interesting list of articles ot attire might be com- 
piled from these wills. We find coats of various materials : 
frieze, buckskin, fustian ; doublets are made of ' worsett ' 
(? worsted), buckskin, say, or leather; jackets are generally 
described by their colours : grey, blue, tawney, marble, black ; 
one is made of say, without sleeves, and another is described 
as ' my greatest kelter jackett ' ; gowns are ' fox furred,' ' lyned 
with saye,' ' tawnie,' ' violett,' damask, ' reversed wythe vel- 
vett ' ; a ' Spanyshe jerkyn ' occurs, ' my best over hose or 
sloppes,' ' my best understockinges,' ^ my best blacke britches,' 
^ one paire of fustian sieves ' and ' one smokke redie maide.' 

Head gear is represented by ' my best sylke hatt,' a ' black 
button bonnet,' a white cap, ' one velvett bonett eged w' gold, 
ij frountlettes and one patlett of velvett.' Mistress Beckwith 
of Clint possessed a ^ gould belly men t,' whatever that may have 

Arms and armour are not often referred to, but the follow- 
ing are mentioned : jack, ' stele cote,' ' steill bonette,' ' stele 
cappe,' ' salletts,' one buckler, several bills and swords, one 
* Carlille axe ' and one ' calever.' In Thomas Coghill's inven- 
tory (1585) are 'his apparell, with a prevy coyte, iij//. vjj. 
viij^. In the chamber att grese headd (i.e. at the head of the 
stairs), thre stele capes, xijj.' Three side-saddles occur. 

Books were few and far between. Thomas Coghill, men- 
tioned above, gave all his books to his son, ' and if he shall 
die, then they to remayne to my next heire ' ; John Lockwood 
had ' a bouke of Crownacles.' 

Horses and dogs too are rarely mentioned. John Fitz- 
Thomas of Bilton Park (1541) gives ' to my lorde of Com- 
brelande, one crose of golde, with one cople of houndes and 
ther lyomes (leashes) and one blake begill and his lyome and 
his coller.' Another testator has a colt called ' Bay Tunstall.' 



Many names of cows and oxen may be found in this 
volume, e.g. : ^ Alblacke/ ' Brodehead/ ^ Byrkell/ ' Defte/ 
' Dowglas/ ' Flowrillj' ' Gallande/ ' Gareland/ ' Grenehorne/ 
' Lowley,' ' Lyllye/ ' Marrigold/ ' Mother Like,' ' Scubeld/ 
' Sether/ ' Sperehorne/ ' Spinkeld/ ' Taggeld ' and ' Topping 

Of curious christian names only one calls for note, viz. : 
'Agapite,' son of Thomas Beckwith of Clint, 15 17. 

Space will not allow of any more extracts. May we, in 
conclusion, call the attention of Dr. Collins and the Surtees 
Society to the urgent need of a glossary ? An excellent 
examination paper could be made of the archaic and obsolete 
words. Few people, we imagine, would be able offhand to 
explain the following terms : ^one bolster with a codware,* 
' one dishbinke,' ' one reckand,' ' one great ' kymling,' ' one 
broling iron,* ' sousekittes,' ' a vergious brake,' ' a garded 
twentye whye,' ' one umble ewe,' ' happins,' ' iiij par of 
herden,' ' ij of the best whisynges,' ' vij chymies,' or ' two 
wombles, one of them a scoring womble, the other a harde 

The second volume^ to be noticed is edited by Mr. J. W. 
Clay, F.S.A., than whom there is no greater authority on 
Yorkshire genealogy. It contains 239 wills, between 1516 
and 1 55 1, principally those of great landowners and mem- 
bers of Visitation families. Here we are moving throughout 
among people of position : peers, knights, squires, gentlemen, 
city magnates, and their wives and daughters. In some ways 
therefore, though not in others, this volume is of greater 
interest than the last. We read of jewellery and plate, tapes- 
tries and dresses that would be of fabulous value in these days 
of the millionaire collector, but we miss in a large measure 
some of those charming little touches of human nature which 
we found among the smaller folk. 

There are some interesting directions as to burials and 
tombs, but not so many as might have been expected. 

Sir Thomas Johnson of Lindley (1542) directs — 

that myne executours do cause a stone to be laide upon me, an ymage of the 
Nativitie of oure Lorde sett opon the same, and an ymage of my self maide 
knelinge under, with myne armes in foure corners of the same stone to be. 
likewise sett for a remembrance. 

Surtees Society, vol. 106. 


Sir William Gascoigne of Gawthorp (1545) directs to be 
buried in the parish church of Harewood — 

on the southe side where my auncesters do lye. Item, I give fortie poundes 
to the settinge furthe of a quere there, and to make a tomb over my grave. 

Alderman Thomas Thomson of Hull : — 

I will that my wif cause make upon the stone whiche I have bought to lay 
upone my grave, a picture of latten for myself, for ij wives, and for my children, 
with scriptur about it, and the iiij evangelistes, with my marchaunt marke set 
upon it, after the best manner. 

Sir William Middleton of Stockeld (1549) directs to be 
buried — 

in the quere of Sainct Nicolas of the south syd of the parishe churche of 
Ilkeley, under the stone that myne ancetoure Sir Peres Myddylton lyethe. 

Sir James Strangways (1541) directs that — 

my executors by the advise of the lorde Dacre, shall maike one ile of the southe 
side of the quere of Osmoderley, of the length of the quere, and to bestowe 
of the buyldinge thereof xl/i., to th'entent that I and my wif may be buried 

Nicholas Bosville of Denaby (i 52 1) orders ' a through stone 
to lay on my grave, withe scripture of laton of the same, xb/ 
Richard Willoughby, alderman of Nottingham directs 

(1545) '— 

I will that my bodie shall be buried in the churche of Sancte 

at Nottingeham, nighe unto the plaice where as my father was buried, and to 
have at my buriall thre masses withe note, that is to saie, the masse of the 
Holy Goste, the masse of Our Ladie, and the masse of Requiem. Item, my 
will and mynde is to be buried under stole. 

In 1 54 1, John Mering of Mering makes most elaborate 
provision for his funeral and obit ; the services, the number 
and weight of the tapers, the alms, the bedesmen and their 
gowns, and many other matters are set out in great detail. 

There are two interesting statements of the motives which 
led to the making of the will at a particular time. 

Ralph Gascoigne of Wheldale (1522) makes his will 
because he is ' intendyng to go to the Kinge's warres when it 
shall please his grace.' 

Walter Paslew of Riddlesden (1544) makes his will 
because he is — 

entendinge, by the gracie of God, accordinge to the kinges comaundement, by 
his letters to me directed, shortelie to take my jorney towarde the Scottes, for 
the defence of the realme of Englande. 



The lists of plate are so numerous that it is difficult to 
make a selection ; a few of the more important ones follow. 
Katherine, Countess of Northumberland (1542) : — 

A standinge cope doble gilte, with, a cover pounced and paris worke ; a 
pounsett goblett gilte with, a cover ; a cope of assey with a cressande sett on 
the bodome ; a spoone with an acorne, doble gilte ; my gret silver crose 
with oure ladie and Sancte John, with a foot of silver and gilte to sett the 
crose in over the altare ; a silver foote gilte, to putt in reliques, with three wiers 
of silver to stande on ; a spone with Sancte Katheryne doble gilte ; a cope of 
assay with a cresande ; a longe silver spone for sokett ; a longe forke of silver 
for sokett ; a pix of silver set in burralles for the sacrament ; a hollie watter 
fatte, with a cover of silver and a swenkyll of silver to the same [etc.]. 

John Neville, Lord Latimer (1542), mentions : — 

Towe of my best gilte standinge cuppes with covers, towe gilte goblettes 
with one cover, my best basinge and ewer of silver, my towe silver flaggons. 

Sir William Middleton of Stockeld (1549) : — 

I will one goblett with the cover of silver and doble gilte, weing twenty 
and eghte ownces or ther abouts, to rema^ne at my howse at Stockelde as an 
herelome from heire to heyre, in recomipence of suche heyrlomes as I put awaye 
for the lone to the Kinges Majesty, and that my heyres frome one to an other 
shall have the occupancy and possession of the said goblet. 

Sir Marmaduke Constable of Everingham (1541) leaves to 
his son Robert — 

a basyne with ewer of silver, havinge myne armes and my wife's, a pare of 
standinge pottes, marke With, lions, the King of Skotte's armes, to remayne as 
airlomes to his here after hyme. 

Dame Elizabeth Savile (1541) : — 

One goblet of silver without a cover ; one silver goblet with a cover ; a 
silver sake gilte, with a cover ; one silver goblet ; ij gret silver saltes, parcell 
gilte, with a cover ; a paire of beades with gawdes of golde ; one paire of 
corall beades. 

Dame Jane Constable of Wassand (1540) : — 

Two basins and ewers of silver ; * a dussen silver spoones with th'appostles 
gilted of ther endes ; a litle standinge pece with a cover doble gilte ; a gret 
sake with a cover, parcell gilte ; a lide sake with a cover, parcell gilte ; a gret 
sake, parcell gilte, without cover ; a litle silver canne wdth a cover ' ; besides 
numerous spoons, some gilt. 

Christopher Stapleton of Wighill (1537) mentions the 
following silver : — 

* A sake of silver, covered, percell gilte,' * a goblet of silver and gilte, 
without a cover,' * a long spone for grene gjmger,' * xij silver spones of Sancte 


John,* * too spones sylver and gylte,' ' one silver cuppe gilte, of th'olde facione,' 

* a litle silver flagon for rose water,' * a gilte cuppe with a cover, called a peyre, 
and a noder cuppe of the facyone of an nutte, called grypeege,' * the seale of 
my armes in sylver, and a rynge called a sygnet, with a Sarasyn heide graven 
in it,' * a basen and one ewer of silver, too boUes and a cover therunto of 
antyke worke, one grete holoe boole gilte, with a cover, one odre litle flatte 
cuppe of silver with a cover ' ; * one cuppe of silver called a peyre.' 

Robert Creyke of Beverley (1538) : — 

Thre books of sylver, chaiste and gilte, withe a cover ; a basynge with a 
newer of sylver, percell gilte ; a standinge cupe of sylver and gilte withe a 
cover, with my armes in the toppe ; a sylver pott gilted, wythe a cover, with 
my armes in them ; a standinge cupe of sylver gilte with a cover, and the 
image of Sanct John the Baptiste in the knope of the cover ; a pott of sylver 
gilte with a cover, and a colobyne in the toppe ; sex spones of silver and gilten 
knoppys, and roses in the knoppes ; ij spones of sylver slipped at the endes ; 
a white pot of sylver withe a cover, not gilte ; a goblet of sylver percell gilte, 
without a cover ; one whit sylver pott, withoute a cover ; a goblet of sylver 
percell gilt, withe a cover ; a whit pott of sylver, withoute a cover. 

Another interesting will is that of Katherine Nandike, late 
Prioress of Wickham (1541). She bequeaths — 

* to my laidie counties of Northumberlande one silver crosse, ij standinge maser 
and a corporax ; to eght of my susters that was professide in Wikham Abbay, to 
every one of theme v']s, viijV.' ; to a god-daughter *a pair of awmer bedes,*" 
and to a niece * one rabande of ij yerdes of silke, and ij silver aglettes.' 

Isabel Swales, a sister of the hospital at Killingwoldgrove 
(1536)5 bequeaths — 

to the House of Killyngraves my greatest maser, to bee an heyrelome in the 
House, and not to be taken frome it, but to bee in the kepyng of the eldest 
Broder, orels th'eldest Suster, and thaye to bring it forthe at there being in the 

Roger Tochetts of Guisbrough (1536) gives to his son 
and heir ' one sake of sylver and vj sylver spones with madyn 
hedes of ther ends.' 

We also find ' a whit sylver goblet that I use to ett pot- 
tage/ ' a writhyne rynge of golde/ other rings set with ' a 
stone of turkas,' a ^ turquays ' or ' a Turkie stone ' (turquois), 
a ' Cornell,' a ' nemerald,' and a ' camewe * ; ' a pare of jeatt 
beades with silver gawdies,' ' one paire of aimer (amber) 
beades with silver gawdies,' a silver whistle, and 'a silver 
spoyne with a forke to eate suckett withe.' 

The best will for jewellery is that of Thomasine Bussey of 
Newstead (1545). She bequeaths — 


I lO 


ij rynges, one havinge a dyamond, the other a rubie ; a rynge with a saphire ; 
a crosse of golde with a diamonde and a cheyne of golde ; a Sancte Andros 
crose of golde with iij rubyes and ij perles and a cheyne ; a crose of golde with 
fyv'e diamondes and thre pendant perles ; a flower of golde, diverslie enamelyde, 
with a rubie, a saphire, lupe and a perle ; a pomander of golde, sett with thre 
diamondes, ij rubyes, yj perles, hanginge at a chayne of golde ; a Sancte 
Anthony's crose of golde, with a bell ; a corse of golde wire with a grett 
buckill and a pendant ; a litle chaj-ne of golde with towe agglettes of golde ; 
the secunde corse, with buckell and pendante ; a floure of golde, with a 
Tubie, a saphire and a perle ; the third corse, with buckill and pendant. 

Margaret Newby of Kirkfenton (i 53 1) leaves ' one pare ot 
corall beades with sylver gawdies.' 

Thomas Thomson, alderman of Hull (1540), mentions 
some interesting items : — 

My brasyne morter with the pestell, whiche morter haithe my marchaunte 
marke set upon it ; my golde ringe with the greatest safFure beinge in it ; a 
golde ringe with an other safFoure set therin ; my best bedes of silver and 
gilte, contenynge in nombre vij""^ and x, besides the gawdes ; a great candle- 
stike of latten with xv floures or lightes therto belonginge. 

Katherine, Countess of Northumberland (1542)5 mentions 
the following tapestries : — 

ij peces of arrayes with the xij aposties and xij proffettes ; a hanginge of 
rede and grene say, paynted with a border of the birth of Christe ; a grene 
hanginge plajTie, with a border of antike warke ; iiij peces of newe arras of the 
storie of Venus ; thre peces of tapstrie werke of Alexander ; a hanginge 
paynted red and yolowe, with a border of the passion ; a coverynge of a bede 
oversee warke, with birdes and beasts on it ; thre quishinges [cushions], 
wherof towe of carpett warke, the thirde tapstre warke with pounde garnettes 
[pomegranates], etc. 

Mrs. Isabel Craike (1548) : — 

The chamber hinginges of fullarie worke payntid, with one bed ot 
cremisen satten and white, and the curtanes of reade sarcenet and blewe ; one 
coveringe of a bed of ymagerie worke unlyned, whiche cost me five pounde ; 
iij quishinges with popingaes of them ; a diaper borde clothe withe birde 
eyes ; one coveringe withe the hanginge of grene sae paynted ; a teaster for a 
bed maide of my lorde Cardinall armes ; vj quishinges of tufftes, withe birdes 
in them ; my best carpet of parke warke. 

Leonard Percehay of Ryton, esq. (15 16), directs — 

that my best gowne be given to the use of , my chauntry in Elirkeby 
Mysperton to maike a vestement of, to pay for my soull and myn ancestres. 

Robert Creyke of Beverley mentions — 

the parlour hanginges and the chawmer hanginges of tappistre warke ; a 
gowne of blake atten furred withe budge ; a gowne of blake damaske furred 


with coney ; a gowne of chamlet furred with funes ; a gowne of browne 
blewe furred with coney ; a tawney velvet jacket ; a gowne of blake clothe, 
lyned withe blake satten and garded withe blake velvet ; a gowne of russett 
clothe furred with buge ; my best dublett of tawney satten. 

Jane Hammer ton (1537) bequeaths — 

my mariage gowne of russet damaske, with the sieves turneupe with russet 
velvet, and a plagard to the same, a kyrtle of tawny saten and a square patled 
of white saten and golde, a paire of sieves of cremysyn satten, one velvet bonet 
blake with a white frontelet of satten with golde, ij edges of silke womens 
worke of gold. 

As might be expected, we find some valuable lists of arms 
and armour. 

Sir Brian Stapleton of Burton Joyce (1545) bequeaths to 
his son Richard — 

all my harnes that is other (either) in my armye chamber or other placies, 
that is to say, jackes, sallettes, splentes, almen revettes, legges harnesses, and all 
my bowes, arrowes, or shefFe of arrowes, haylles, standerdes, and any other 
manner of harness that belongithe to warre. 

Christopher Wilberfoss (1533) gives a sword and buckler 
to his son Roger ; a baslard to each of his sons John, Robert 
and Henry ; to his son William, ' a jacke, a salett, vij chymies, 
a gorgett of male, and a halbart ' ; to his son Roger, ' a salett, 
a halbarte, a corsett of whit harnes, a fold of male, and a pare 
of splentes' ; to his son John, *a litle jacke' ; to his son 
Robert ' a pare of briganders, with the reversion of a fold of 
male, and an olde gorgett.' 

John Bassett of Fledborough, esq. (1542), mentions ^ all 
my harnes and all other my weapens mett and convenyent 
fore warre.' 

As regards individual objects of rarity, we may mention 
first of all two clocks. 

Richard Byngham of Carcolston (1531), desires that — 

my cloke with the bell, the side borde in the haull with the tristillis set in the 
ground, and a pare of yrn galos in the chymnaye, doe remayne as heireloomes. 

James Conyers of Whitby (1541) gives to the parish 
church — 

one payre of orgayns and one clocke, and one goodlie chales of silver, doble gilte 
with golde, for to mynistre my maker withall. 

Two other organs occur in addition to the one just 

I 12 


Christopher Stapleton of Wighill (1537) gives — 

to the parishe churche of Wighall a paire of organes that standeth in the hye 
quere of the churche. 

Christopher Wilberfoss (1533) leaves 4^. for 'the 
mendyng of the organes for the mayneteynyng of God's 

The only other musical instrument, except hunting-horns, 
occurs in the will of Thomas Brigham (1542). He bequeaths 
to his son Ralph, ' my chamlett gowne, my long night gowne, 
both my chamlett jackets, and a paire of virginals.' He also 
left to his brother-in-law his ' great hawke,' from which it 
might appear that he was something of a sportsman as well as 
a musician. 

Lancelot Stapleton of Wath was better equipped for the 
chase. He mentions — 

all my houndes ; my best crosse bowe : my bygest horne flowede withe s^'lver ; 
all my longe bowes and my quyver ; my quaile nett and my flight nett ; my 
partrike nettes called a tonnell, and my towe partrike horse. 

We may quote here a quaint bequest made by Ralph Bigod 
of Seaton (1545). He gives — 

to my nawnte Warrayn the graie horse whiche I had of her, if he goo streght, 
and if he goo not streyghte, then she to have the white amblinge mere whiche 
I had of Maister Baites, and she to give to myn executores my ringe of golde, 
enambeled with blacke letters. 

John Neville, Lord Latimer (1542), directs — 

that after my decesse the Master and Vicare [of Well] shall take all the rentes 
of the parsonedge of Sancte Georgie Churche in Yorke, for the terme of fortie 
yeres, and therwith to fynde a scole maister at Well for kepinge a scole and 
techinge of gramer ther, and to pray for me and them that I am most bounden 
to pray for. 

This school is still in existence. 

Books, as in the previous volume, occur but rarely. 

Walter Clifton of Gray's Inn (1540) bequeaths to 
Christofer Holme of PauU Holme — 

Feherber bridgementes, with other moo bookes of the lawe, so that he do 
continewe and studie the lawes of this realme at London, at one of the Innes 
of the Courte or of the Chancerie, by the spacie of iij or iiij yeres. 

Fitzherbert's y^^^n^^;;?^;/^ was first printed in 15 14, and again 
in 1 5 16. Other books mentioned are flower of the ten 
commandementes^ Rationale Divinorum el Summa Angelica j Casus 


decvetalium et doctorum^ Chawcer^ and a Booke of Merie Con- 
ceytes. All these belonged to Edmund Kingston, vicar of 
Southwell in 1549. He also possessed 'a bed steade of foure 
postes carved/ ' a paynnted clothe of the pictour of the King 
opon it/ ' a pictour of Marie Maglene/ and ' a paynnted 
clothe havyng three doc tours opon it/ 

William Molyneux (1541) explains a well known expres- 
sion: — 

A holl gamyshe of pewther vessell newe, that is to say, xij platers, xij 
dishes, xij sawcers, xij potedgers. 

Among miscellaneous articles we may mention a ' flanders 
chiste with a rounde lid/ 'my lambecke (alembic) and my 
bras pott to sett it on ' ; another * lymbeke of tin ' ; and a 
* stillitorie/ or distilling apparatus. 

James Conyers of Whitby (1541) gives 

to the repayringe of the bridge xxj., with shoppes of the briges, whiche I 
buyldide of my proper costes and chardges, I give to the brige for ever. 

It appears from this that the old bridge at Whitby had, like so 
many others, a row or rows of shops along it. 

Isabel Swales (1536) bequeaths ' to the Godeslove beddes 
at Beverlay yaites in Hull, a paire of sheites.' Tanner 
mentions a hospital at Hull, called ' God's House,' which is 
probably the one here referred to. 

Henry Clifford, Earl of Cumberland, generally known as 
the ' Shepherd Lord,' makes a curious provision for an 
unmarried daughter : — 

I will that the laydie Elizabeth, my doughter, shall have for her mariage 
a thousande poundes sterlinge, if she be maried to a man of honoure, beinge an 
erle or an erle's sone and heyre or heire apparaunte, his lands beinge unherited ; 
and if she be maried to a barrone or a barron's sone and heyre or heyre 
apparaunte, a thousand markes sterlinge ; and if she be maried unto a knyghte 
havinge his landes unheryted, eight hundreth markes. 

An editorial note states that Elizabeth married Sir Christopher 
Metcalfe of Nappa, so that presumably she had to be content 
with ;£533 6j. 8^. instead of 1,000. ' Unherited ' appears to 
mean ' not settled,' so that the intended husband would be 
free to make a settlement on his wife. 
Thomas Fenton (1547) gives — 

to my ladie Nevill one olde riall, evermore desiringe her to be good ladie to 
my litle meyde, her god doughter, as my trust is in her so to be. 

Edmund Clifton (1547) gives — 



to Sir Gervys Clifton, knyght, the standinge cuppe of silver and gilte and a 
goblett parcel gilte, which hee hath all redie in his custodie, opon condicion 
that he helpe and assiste my wif, and do not enforce her nor be abowte here to 
take any husbande but suche as she shall willinglie be pleased and contented 
with, nor be abowte to do here any other displeasour, neyther by worde nor 
dede ; and if he do any thinge contrarie to this condicion, then this bequeste 
to be voide. 

A liberal minded husband, this ! 

Richard Plumpton of York (1544) seems to have antici- 
pated that his death would not be unwelcome to some of his 
relatives, and to have been quite resigned to the fact. He 
gives — 

to Mr. William Plompton and his childer twoo hoggesheades of wyne to maike 
merie withall. 

Edmund Clifton (1547) gives 4.0s, to Jane Mering — 

of this condicion, that she shall professe and knowlege hereself not to have 
[done] here dewtie to me and to my wif, before Mr. parson and iiij or fyve of 
the honester men in the parishe. 

One wonders what poor Jane had done that she should be 
pilloried in this way, but no further light is thrown on her 

Miss Thorpe was clearly another obstreperous damsel, for 
her father, John Thorpe of Thorpe (1533), bequeaths — 

to Issabell my doughtor to hir mariage xl marcs, if she be rulede aftre my feoffes, 
or els never a pennye. 

The will of Stephen Tempest of Broughton (1549) con- 
tains the following very enigmatic sentence : — 

I will that my said wif have and enyoe (enjoy) quyetelie suche lodgyng 
as is benethe the floore of the haull, duryng her widdoheade. 

At first sight this reads like a pious wish that Mrs. Tempest 
should be interred under the hall, the very opposite to the 
desire of Christopher Tancred of Whixley, an eccentric York- 
shireman who, two centuries later, directed that his coffin should 
be suspended from the hall rafters ; but as it is open to 
another construction, the testator should have the benefit of the 

These extracts must close with an equally obscure quota- 
tion from the will of Thomas Nevill of Sancton, 1531 : — 

Item, I will that they that hath my lande in the towne of Santon 
kepe it. 

Mr. Clay's book, like the previous one, would have been 
improved by a glossary, but this is all that the most carping 
critic can say in its dispraise. 



THE old house of Leigh- 
ton of Shropshire may 
easily find place amongst those 
few English families which can 
point to a twelfth-century fore- 
father. Needless to say that 
round a landed house of which 
records carry back the story to 
a date within a century of 
Domesday, the early pedigree 
makers busied themselves with 
their wonted success. The 
longer the pedigree given into 
their hands the more anxious 
were they to tag to it some 
ancestor who should wander in the misty places beyond the 
conquest-year, giving thereby to the family record the grace 
which would be added to Berkeley Castle by an Anglo-Saxon 
tower under the hand of a Victorian jerry-builder. 

To the credit of the College of Arms be it said that Tress- 
well and Vincent, visiting the county in 1622, were content 
to begin their table with the true ancestor of Leighton, al- 
though cloaking him with the unlikely name of ' Titus de 
Leighton, miles,' and marrying him, whom Eyton sets down 
as a contemporary of Henry I., to a sister of the Valence Earl 
of Pembroke who was to be born some hundred years later. 
But those who followed Somerset and Rouge Croix were less 
restrained, and in Wotton's English Baronetage^ that casket of 
spurious legend, we find Leighton in England ' long before 
the Conquest and of noble extraction, as appears by Dooms- 
day-book,* which venerable record, as may be guessed, is 
innocent of such false witnessing. As in the case of Sewal, 
founder of the ancient house of Shirley of Ettington, the un- 



familiar Christian name of the patriarch of the Leightons has 
been used as an argument for his Anglo-Saxon origin. And 
here to our wonder the learned Eyton may be called to war- 
rant the guesses of Wotton and his fellows, for the historian of 
feudal Shropshire, puzzled by the name of Tihel, hazards the 
opinion that Tihel must have been an Anglo-Saxon. When 
we have shown that Tihel is outlandish and Breton to boot, 
the case for the old English origin of Leighton falls to the 
ground, and this is shown clearly by the description of the 
Domesday holder of Bumpstead in Essex as 'Tihel the 
Breton.' ^ Doubtless when 

William de Coningsby 
Came out of Brittany 
With his wife Tiffany 
And his maid Manfas 
And his dog Hardigras 

his neighbour Tihel of Leighton made the passage of the 
Channel with that famous and joyous family party. 

Tihel's son Richard appears as Richard Fitz Tiel in the 
cart^e of ii 66, holding a knight's fee of old feoffment in 
the barony of William FitzAlan. His trespass in the forest 
and his giving of false evidence reveal him as living in 1177 
and 1 178, and he may have been the Richard de Letton, a 
plaintiff in a suit of 11 94. He is succeeded by his son, 
another Richard, who, by a deed yet existing at Leighton, had 
confirmation from William FitzAlan in 1200 or 1201 of his 
ancestor's estate of ' Lecton.' 

Since the days when Tihel founded the house of Leighton 
his descendants have for the most part been content to add 
little to the history of the country. Writing themselves 
knights and esquires, sheriffs, justices of the peace and cus- 
todes rotulorum, colonels of the militia and members of the 
court of the Welsh Marches, they have done their duty in 
Shropshire. Themis of the quarter sessions has called them 
blessed, and the muse of medieval history, who goes clad in 
scarlet, has passed them by to their enduring good fortune. 
For families eager to meddle with the affairs of state, whose 
swords are ready to whip out for a red or white rose, take, 
as a rule, light root in their lands, and the Leightons are still 

^ See * Helion of Helions Bumpstead,' by J. H. Round, M.A., in the 

transactions of the Essex Archeeological Society for 1901. 


lords of their Shropshire manors. A Leighton of Stretton-in- 
the-Dale was steward in Montgomery for Richard of York, but 
like a wise steward he saw from afar the turn of the tide, and 
he was Henry VIL's man before ever the crown was picked 
out the hawthorn bush. His descendant, Edward Leighton of 
Wattlesborough, displayed no less cautious prescience when he 
joined the grave council board of the Whig plotters in the 
interest of William of Orange, to whom at the Hague 
Edward's brother. Captain Baldwin Leighton, carried their 
resolutions. A Williamite baronetcy given in 1693 rewarded 
the family loyalty to the new sovereigns. Daniel Leighton, 
son of Sir Edward the first baronet, was a lieutenant-colonel 
of horse and fought at Fontenoy and elsewhere, whilst his 
brother, the second baronet, made family history by changing 
his seat at Wattlesborough for Loton. The sixth baronet, 
a general of King George's forces, was wounded in America 
and saw the opening of the Peninsular war. More noteworthy 
in the story of the Leightons is the truly remarkable parlia- 
mentary record of a family which may be said to have made 
the representation of Shropshire in parliament hereditary in 
their line since the mother of parliaments began. On another 
page of this present number of 'The Ancestor will be found a 
memorial of this record as it has been traced for us by Mr. 
J. H. Round, who has arranged for the first time the story of 
this family's parliamentary history. It will be noted that the 
Leightons, keen Whigs under William III., have now gone 
the road of many other Whig houses in refusing to translate 
old Whig as new Liberal. 

Such a family seated firmly upon the land in God's 
peace and the king's might be trusted to advance itself by 
its marriages. With Ankaret Burgh, a coheir of the lords 
of Mawddwy, John the Lancastrian -Yorkist had Wattles- 
borough, Cardeston and Loton, all lordships in Salop, which 
are still in the hands of the family. Stretton had come by a 
match with Cambray, and the heir of the Leicester Warrens 
of Tabley was wife of the eighth baronet. 

The ninth baronet. Sir Bryan Baldwin Mawddwy Leigh- 
ton, is now of Loton and has sons to follow him, so that after 
eight centuries the line of Tihel of Leighton endures and 
flourishes in the county of Shropshire. 

The arms of Leighton would seem to point to some early 
connection by blood or tenure with the house of FitzWarin. 


The shield as now borne is quarterly gold ana gmes tnaentea. 
This shield with a baston over it appears first upon the seal in 
white wax of Sir Richard Leighton, lord of Leigh ton, appended 
to a charter dated at Leighton 1 3 July, 1 3 1 5, and the coat 
with the baston is likewise found upon the effigy in Leighton 
church, which is attributed to this same Sir Richard. 

O. B. 


Sir Richard de Leighton, Kt., of Leighton, 
Shropshire, M.P. for Shropshire in six 
Parliaments, 1313, 1314, 131 6, 1318* 

John de Leighton 

John Leighton, esq. 

Edward Leighton, esq. 

John Leighton, esq. M.P. for Shropshire 1472, 1478 


. i — ~ 

William Leighton of 
Plash, Shropshire 

William Leighton of Plash 

William Leighton, M.P. for 
Much Wenlock, i6oi 

Sir Thomas Leighton, Kt. 
John Leighton, esq. 

I — : 

Sir Edward Leighton, Kt. 
M.P. for Shropshire 1553, 


Sir Charlton Leighton, 
3rd Bart. 

Sir Thomas Leighton, 
Kt. M.P. for Worces- 
tershire 1 60 1 

Thomas Leighton, esq. 
Robert Leighton, esq. 
Edward Leighton, esq. 

Robert Leighton, esq. M.P. for Shrewsbury 1661-78 

Sir Edward Leighton, ist Bart., contested Shropshire 1695, 
M.P. for Shropshire 1698, and for Shrewsbury 1708 


I : 

Sir Edward Leighton, 
2nd Bart. 


General Daniel Leighton, 
M.P. for Hereford 1747 


Baldwin Leighton, esq. 



Sir Baldwin Leighton, 
6th Bart. 

Sir Charlton Leighton, 
4th Bart. M.P. for 
Shrewsbury 1774 (un- 
seated), 1780-90 

Sir Baldwin Leighton, 7th 
Bart., M.P. for South 
Shropshire 1859-65 


I. . I 

Sir Baldwin Leighton, Stanley Leighton, esq., of 

8th Bart., M.P. for Sweeney Hall, Shropshire, 

South Shropshire 1877-85 M.P. for North Shropshire 
d. 1897 1874-85, and for West 

Shropshire 1 885-1 901, d. 1901 

^ See Eyton's Shropshire, vii. 333-4. But the number is there given as five, because'^the 
1 316 return had not then come to light. Three of these Parliaments were in 13 13. — 




ABOUT Mty years ago, in the course ot a careful account 
of the stained glass then existing at Salisbury, Mr. Charles 
Winston published in the Salisbury volume of the Archaeo- 
logical Institute some valuable hints as to the probable owner- 
ship and date of the remarkable series of escutcheons which 
are so conspicuous at the base of the great west window in 
the nave of the cathedral. 

The present writer does not claim to have done very much 
more. AH that is attempted in these notes is to carry the 
investigation a little further, and to offer one or two sugges- 
tions in the hope of throwing a little more light on this 
interesting subject. 

So far as the writer is aware these shields have never been 
separately illustrated, although two of them and part of two 
others, one of which no longer exis'cS, are outlined in the 
79th plate in Carter's Ancient Architecture, They are however 
of such exceeding interest, and are so completely representa- 
tive of English heraldic art of the second half of the thir- 
teenth century that they have been drawn accurately to scale, 
with the leads marked and coloured in water colour, so as 
to show as nearly as possible the appearance which they pre- 

The glass of which they are fashioned is exceedingly thick 
and heavy, and the colouring is perfectly luminous and well 
preserved. The capricious lines of the lead-work, which are 
very noticeable in some of the shields, and the broken colour, 
which makes them so splendidly decorative, are doubtless due 
to the costliness of ancient glass, which reached the craftsman 
in quite small pieces, so that even the smallest fragments if 
satisfactory in colour would be treasured and worked into the 
design as occasion served without regard to their shape. 

These shields are all of the same size — 17 inches along 
the line of the chief and 2 1 inches from chief to foot — being 
somewhat narrower and longer in appearance than the con- 
temporary shields carved on the walls of Westminster Abbey. 



There are six of these fine escutcheons, and one other which, 
although so obviously a piece of patchwork that no drawing 
has been made of it, must not be passed without mention. 
They are arranged in the window in the following order : 
(i) gold three cheverons gules ; (2) paly gules and gold ot 
eight pieces ; (3) azure powdered with golden fleur-de-lis ; 
(4) gules three leopards gold ; (5) silver a lion gules crowned 
gold and a border sable bezanty ; (6) gold a cross gules — 
but this enumeration will not be followed in the consideration 
of these armorials. The shield which has disappeared seems 
to have been chequered. 

It is natural to speak first of the shield of England (fig. i), 
which is believed to refer to Henry III. The colour of the 
field is a gorgeous carmine. The leopards are of a beautiful 
golden hue with the shading and outline of their features and 
claws still perfectly distinct. It will be observed that the 
original head of the uppermost has been lost, and that its 
place is filled with a piece of white glass which shows traces of 
having been painted yellow. 

The shape of the beasts, which bear a close resemblance to 
those of Henry III.'s sculptured shield in Westminster Abbey, 
is completely characteristic of the date to which they have 
been assigned. It is not perhaps the most pleasing type. 
There is but little of that striking conventionalism and 
spirited drawing which makes the heraldic animals of fifty or 
sixty years later so delightful to behold ; but the draughts- 
manship has strong individuality, and his bold lines would 
serve to determine the approximate period of this shield even 
if there were no other indication of date. 

The second coat to be described (fig. 2) is a not uncommon 
variant of the arms of the Arragonese Counts of Provence, 
who employed the undiflFerenced gold four pales gules of Arra- 
gon. This was the paternal coat-armour of Eleanor, Queen 
of Henry III. She was the second daughter of Raymond 
Berenger IV., Count of Provence, and there can be but little 
doubt that our shield commemorates her. Much of the red 
glass of it has become almost black in course of time. 

The next escutcheon (fig. 3) demands more than a cursory 
mention. It can only be intended for a representation of that 
earlier form of the arms of France which was carried by the 
French kings from the first quarter of the thirteenth century 
till 1376, when Charles V., desiring to diflPerentiate his own 



arms of France from those assumed by Edward III. nearly 
forty years earlier, ordained that the number of lilies in his 
coat was to be three ^pour symboliser la Sainte-'TrinitS,^ 

The field, of an exquisitely pure and rich blue, is in 
our example simply charged with ten golden fleur-de- 
lis, which, it may be remarked, are of unusually fine and 
massive form. Matthew Paris' MS.-^ gives an even simpler 
type of shield to the French king — ' scutum azureum vi 
gladioli flores aurei ' — and these flowers are of almost exactly 
the same shape as those in the shield at Salisbury. 

The counterseal of Philip III. (1270-85) bears a shield 
charged with ten lilies arranged in the same way as those in 
fig. 3. On the other hand his grandfather, Louis VIII. 
(1223-26), who was the first king to use the complete 
escutcheon of France powdered with lilies on his counterseal, 
employed a shield of the round-headed shape charged with 
eleven whole lilies and parts of four others. 

Our escutcheon is ascribed to Louis IX. (1226-70), the 
brother-in-law and staunch friend of Henry III. He died 
during the eighth (his second) crusade, and was canonized by 
Boniface VIII. in 1297. 

It is scarcely probable that this shield refers to Margaret 
of France, who became Edward I.'s wife in 1299 after the 
death of Eleanor of Castile. If that were the case the arms 
of England would be for Edward I., and the only apparent 
reason for the Arragon shield would be its insertion as a 
memorial to his mother. There are however other indications 
which point to a date earlier than 1299 as that to which the 
shields of England, France and Arragon must be referred. 

The next in order of dignity is charged with the well- 
known arms of Richard of Cornwall (fig. 4). The field is of 
a lovely silvery white, and the border, which at the distance 
of a very few feet appears to be quite black, is really of very 
dark purple glass. The striking form of the rampant lion, 
stiff and restrained yet thoroughly vigorous in drawing, is 
again markedly characteristic of the latter half of the thir- 
teenth century ; and there can be little question that this coat 
is rightly attributed to Richard, second son of King John, 
created Earl of Cornwall and Poitiers by his brother Henry 
in 1225, and elected King of the Romans in 1256. He was 

^ Cotton MS. Nero. D. i. 



thrice married, first to Isabel Marshal, the widow of Gilbert 
de Clare, first Earl of Gloucester and Hertford, and after her 
death to Sancia of Provence, the youngest of Raymond's 
daughters. He died a few months before his brother King 
Henry, and his third wife, Beatrice von Falkenstein, survived 

The drawing of his arms by Matthew Paris is almost pre- 
cisely similar in style and feeling to the shield at Salisbury. 
The lion is however somewhat less stiff, and there are fewer 
besants in the border. 

A word may be said here with regard to the patchwork 
shield which finds a place among these armorials. This is an 
escutcheon of the same size and shape as the rest of the 
series, displaying a field of silvery glass with a green demon 
and a blue border charged with besant-like disks of yellow 
glass. Of these materials the white and the yellow have all 
the appearance of thirteenth-century glass, the demon seems 
to be sixteenth-century work, and the blue glass of the border 
is certainly modern. It is possible that the white glass and 
yellow disks are parts of another coat of arms which once 
belonged to this group, perhaps a second escutcheon of Corn- 
wall, referring to Henry, first surviving son of the King of 
the Romans. After fighting on the king's side at Lewes, 
where he was taken prisoner. Prince Henry took the cross in 
1268, and while on his way home from the crusade was mur- 
dered by the sons of Simon de Montfort at Viterbo in 1271. 
It is hardly likely that a second Cornwall shield, if these 
fragments be really part of those arms, would refer to Edmund 
of Almaine, the second son of Richard's second marriage, 
since he does not emerge from obscurity till 1272, when he 
succeeded his father as Earl of Cornwall at the age of twenty- 

The Clare shield (fig. 5) has suffered somewhat from 
the effects of more than 600 years of weathering, and the 
tinctures though perfectly distinct are darker than those of 
the other coats-of-arms. A striking feature in this escutcheon 
is the extreme narrowness of the cheverons characteristic ot 
the period, the red glass which is exposed between the edges 
of the leads being only just three-quarters of an inch in width. 
In spite of this the elegant angle of the sharply-pointed 
cheverons enables them to fill the^ field in a really beautiful 



There is no reason to question the assignment of this 
shield to Gilbert de Clare, who succeeded his father Richard 
as third Earl of Cornwall and Hertford in 1262. Five years 
earlier Gilbert had married Alice de Lusignan, daughter of 
the king's half-brother Guy, Count of Cognac, whose aunt 
and namesake became the wife of another great English noble, 
John de Warenne, Earl of Surrey, in 1247. 

The last shield of this collection which survives remains 
to be considered (fig. 6). It is noteworthy that the cross is of 
the same remarkable narrowness that has been observed in the 
cheverons of de Clare, so that instead of occupying one-fifth of 
the escutcheon, which the pedants define as the proper width 
for an uncharged cross, it is in this example litde more than 
one-eighth of the field. This coat is believed to be that of 
Roger le Bigod, fourth Earl of Norfolk (1225-70). 

There was at least one other shield belonging to this 
group, for a part of a cheeky shield, intended doubtless for 
the arms of Warenne, is shown in Carter's plate of the Chap- 
ter House windows ; but the present writer has no knowledge 
of its ever having appeared with the rest in the west window 
of the nave. 

If the date which has been suggested for these coats be 
correct, namely a few years before 1272, this lost shield would 
refer to John de Warenne, Earl of Surrey (i 240-1305), who 
married the elder Alice de Lusignan, aunt of Gilbert de Clare's 

The relationships between the various bearers of these 
shields of arms is shown in the accompanying table, where the 
names of those to whom the arms are believed to refer are 
given in capital letters. But a desire to record a number of 
not very closely connected matches seems hardly reason 
enough to account for so remarkable a ' levy of shields,' 
though it may have had something to do with the matter. 
Some important event was probably the occasion for the 
painting of this collection of armorial bearings, and it would 
seem that such an event must be sought for between 1262, 
the date of Gilbert de Clare's succession to his earldoms, and 
1270, the year in which St. Louis died. 

May it not be possible that the year 1268, when the cross 
was raised for the eighth time, supplies the required date ? 
It was the crusade of Louis. Henry III, and Eleanor were on 
the throne of England. Their son together with their nephew 



Henry^ son of Richard oj Cornwall^ took the cross ; and the 
example set by these princes was followed by the Earls of 
Surrey and Gloucester, John de Warenne and Gilbert de Clare, 
And if the arms of Roger le Bigod were not included for the 
same reason, he was, in virtue of his office of Marshal, a 
personage of such high importance, and he had been so 
lately reconciled to King Henry, that in some such reasons as 
these may be found the motive for the honour which was 
thereby shown him. 

One last question — why were these shields placed in 
Salisbury Chapter House ? — is, it is to be feared, unanswer- 
rable. It is however almost certain — provided that the con- 
clusions as to proprietorship and date here arrived at are 
correct — that they were not originally made for that position, 
for the building of the Chapter House was not begun till the 
reign of Edward I. was well advanced. But by whose orders 
the escutcheons were made, why and by whom they were 
given to Salisbury Cathedral, and when they were first placed 
in the position which they occupied till they were removed in 
1828 to the great triple lancet in the nave, are riddles which 
still await their solution. 




Dent v. Heard and another 

D-J^ Bill (2 June 1641) of Thomas Dent of Newcastle-on-Tyne, gent., 
complainant against Robert Heard of Newcastle and Anthony Norman. 

Concerning a bond dated 7 April i o Car. I. whereby the complainant 
became bound with John Redhead of Newcastle, yeoman, since de- 
ceased, to the defendant, Robert Heard. The defendant Norman is 
described as a scrivener * and one who hath conceived causeles spleene ' 
against the complainant. 

Daye f . BuBB and others 

D^ Bill (29 June 163 1) of Joseph Daye of the city of London, clerk. 

Answer (10 Oct. 1631) of Forster Elmes of Henley, co. Oxford, and 
Thomas Harvey a/ias Ellis of Strowd, co. Gloucester, defendants with William 
Bubb and John Holliday, both of Strowd, William Barnard of Henley and 
Austin Knappe of Henley. 

Richard Daye, clerk, who about 10 years since 
settled lands in Strowd upon the marriage of 
his son John, He died about two years since 

John Daye, son and heir = Elizabeth Porter, Joseph Daye 

died about one year since, dau. of Patrick of London, 

without issue Porter of Tewx- clerk, compt., 

bury. Married heir of his 

about ten years brother 

Dene v. Hext 

D^V ^ill (27 Oct. 1 631) of Richard Dene of Newton St. Petrocke, co. 
Devon, esquire. 

Answer (at St. Ives, co. Cornwall, 20 Jan. 163^) of Richard Hext, gent. 
Concerning a bond for 20/. (dated 7 July 22 Jac. I.) given by the 
complainant to the defendant, which sum was, according to the com- 
plainant, to be paid only in the event of his recovering lands in 
Upper Loders, co. Dorset, for which he has maintained suits at law for 




the space of seven years. The lands are claimed in respect of the 
compt.'s wife Phillippe, who was sister and heir to Thomas Hele, 
esquire, who died without issue. Arthur Hext, brother to the de- 
fendant, was an ancient servant and a kinsman to the said Thomas 
Hele. The defendant states that Thomas Hele bore no great affec- 
tion to his brother-in-law, and by will gave legacies to the said Arthur, 
for the preferment of him and of his wife and children, and to one 
Mary Champernon, now lately dead. 

Earl of Danbye v. Berrye and another 
DyV Replication (Mich. 6 Car. I.) of Henry, Earl of Danbye, to the 
answers of Richard Berrye, M.D., and Robert Bladen, gent., defendants. 
Concerning the sales of certain fee-farms. 

Daye v. Daye 

Dg-V Replication (Easter 7 Car. I.) of Humphrey Daye, Richard Daye, 
James Daye and Henry Daye, infants, by Henry Martyn and Elizabeth his 
wife, their guardians, to the answers of Frances Daye, widow, and Francis 
Daye, gent., the defendants. 

Concerning the lands late of John Daye, deceased. 

Deave z>. Tompkins 

Dg^ Replication ( ) of John Deave, complainant, to the answer 

of John Tompkins, the defendant. 

Maintaining the bill of complaint. 

Dainty v. Rookes 

D-2^ Bill (23 April 1645) of Thomas Dainty ot London, stationer, 
executor of the will of Robert Milborne, late of London, stationer. 

Demurrer and answer (8 May 1645) of John Rookes of Wickhambrooke, 
CO. Suffolk, gentleman, defendant, with Margaret Webster, relict and extrix. 
of Edward Webster of Hadley, co. Suffolk, notary public. 

Concerning the debts of near 600/. of the said Robert Milborne to 
Thomas Goade, D.D., rector of Hadley, who died about four or five 
years since, to which debt the complainant hath since paid to the 
Doctor's executors. 

Dade v. Toope and others 

D-^ Bill (13 May 1646) of John Dade, citizen and merchant taylor of 


Answers (21 and 22 May 1646) of Henry Toope, Anthony Fryer and 
Henry Wilson. 

Concerning pipes of Canary shipped in the George and Anthony of Lon- 
don, whereof Henry Toope was master, the other defendants being 
his co-partners in the ship. 

Davys v. Jervis 

Bill ( . . . June 1646) of William Davys of Woodford, co. Wilts, 


Answer (23 Oct. 1646) of Thomas Jervis of Wilford, co. Wilts, yeoman. 
Concerning a lease of a farm and lands in Woodford, assigned by the 
defendant to the complainant. 

Dent v. Scarborough 

D2V Bill (17 July 1 641) of Marmaduke Dent of Karkyn, co. York, and 
James Dent his son and heir apparent, compts. against Robert Scarborough of 
Forcet, co. York. 

Concerning leases of closes of land called the Quarrells in Karkyn. 

Dawson v. Dawson and another 
D-gig- Bill (9 Feb. 164 J) of Joan Dawson (relict of Myles Dawson ot 
Crostwaite, co. Westmerland, yeoman, lately deceased), complainant against 
Robert Dawson and his wife and John Hodgson of Cartmell fell, co. 

Concerning the mortgage of a copyhold messuage and lands at Dawson 
Fold made 31 Jan. 1 6 2|- by Robert Dawson of Dawson Fold in the 
Lithe, CO. Westmerland, yeoman, to the said Myles, for the payment 
of 200/. Myles Dawson died about three years since. 

DoD V, Yard 

D2V Bill (20 May 1642) of Timothy Dod, clerk, and Jane his wife, late 
wife and extrix. of Richard Combe of London, haberdasher, deceased. 
Answer (4 June 1642) of Philip Yard of London, haberdasher. 

Concerning the alleged * unfaithfuU dealinge ' of the defendant with 
the said Richard Combe, who late was partner with him in selling 
hatbands at the sign of the Angel in Watling Street. Richard Combe 
died about three years since. 


De la Barr v. Withrings 

Answer, plea and demurrer (28 April 1646) of Thomas Withrings, 
esquire, defendant to the bill of complaint of John de la Barr. 

The defendant has alleged that the complainant promised the defendant 
one third part of the profits of the office of postmaster for foreign parts 
for his using influence with the Earl of Portland, Lord Cottington 
and other friends at Court to procure him a restitution to the said 
place. The complainant also alleges that the defendant beat and 
wounded him whereby he fell into a fever, and was forced to keep his 
bed for eighteen weeks, to his damage to the amount of 1500/., besides 
the expenses of his cure, which amounted to 220/. The complainant 
has also alleged that the defendant offered to make good these losses it 
the complainant would but forgive the injury * and not publish it, 
especiallie to Secretary Cooke/ 

Dellawood V, Hickman and others 
Dgig- Bill (28 Nov. 1645) of Nicholas Dellawood of London, gent. 
Answers (27 Jan. 1645) of Leonard Hickman (defendant with Samuel 
Forrest, Nicholas Bumell, cit. and haberdasher of London, John North, 
Thomas Collins, Grace Slade, John Howard, Richard Smithe and 
Austen, widow). 

Concerning the alleged sale by Nicholas Condall, late of Westminster, 
gent., deceased, to Samuel Forrest of London, gent., of sevoi messuages 
in Knightesbridge and Kensington, co. Middx. By indenture dated 
10 June 5 Car. L the said Condall and Forrest sold their interest 
in the premises to Nicholas Burnell, who was a debtor of the com- 

Dellabarre v. Powell 
D-^ Bill (2 5 June 1 646) of John Dellabarre of London, merchant. 
Answer (6 Feb. 1641-) of Sir Edward Powell of Fulham, co. Middx., 

Concerning a capital messuage in Fenchurch Street, whereof the 
defendant is seised in right of his wife Dame Mary, dau. of Sir Peter 
Vanlore, deceased. 

Dearling zf. Booker and another 
D^ Bill (27 Nov. 1 641) of John Dearling of Horsham, co. Sussex, 
sawyer, on behalf of himself and of John, Richard, Margaret and Hannah, his 
poor children. 

Answers (at Lewes 7 Jan. 1 6\\) of William Booker and William Alcocke 
of Lewes, gent., defendants. 

Concerning the will dated 15 Jan. 162^ of John Booker of St. Johns 
in Lewes, co. Sussex, yeoman. By this will legacies were given to 


Margaret, Mary and Elizabeth Booker, daus. of Roger Booker, brother 
of the testator. The testator made William Booker, his brother, his exor. 
William Alcocke was an overseer of the will. The said Mary and 
Elizabeth died young and unmarried within two or three years of their 
uncle's death, and the said Margaret, wife of the complainant, admin- 
istered their goods. 

Downer v. Veccar 

D-^ Bill (i2 Nov. 1645) of George Downer of St. Katherine's Tower, 
London, cordwainer, and Ann his wife, complainants against Richard Veccar 
the elder and Richard Veccar the younger. 

Concerning the estate of William Browne, deceased, late of Otford, 

CO. Kent, father of the complainant Ann. 

ii iii 

William Browne = A n n e = Stephen Wright = Richard Veccar 

of Otford, died 
about 1624 

died died soon after 

about 2 his marriage 

of Cobham, co. 
Kent, cordwainer 

Thomas Mary George Downer = Anne Richard Veccar 
Browne Browne Browne the younger 


Dickens v. Windle 

Bill (5 Sep. 1645) of Walter Dickens of London, girdler. 
Answer (13 Sep. 1645) of Thomas Windle of Dublin, merchant. 

Concerning a sale in 1639 to the defendant of the household stuff 
which the complainant had in Dublin, the said complainant being about 
to settle in London amongst his friends and acquaintances. 


Dynham v. Bathurst 
Bill (6 June 1645) of Edward Dynham of London, Doctor of 

Third and further answer (22 May 23 Car. L) of George Bathurst, esquire, 

Concerning the estate of Jane, the mother of the complainant, for 
whom and for whose six younger children the defendant was a trustee. 
As Jane Dynham, widow, she had a lease of land in Oakley, co. Bucks, 
22 April 9 Car. L Before 16 June 1 1 Car. L, she was wife of Ezekiel 
Pownall of Wraxall, co. Somerset, clerk. The complainant's uncle, 
William Dynham, is named. The defendant married a sister of the 
said Jane. 



Dallender V. Woodman and others 
D-^ Bill (22 June 163 1) of Ralph Dallender of Buckland, co. Surrey, 

Answer (11 Oct. 163 1) of John Woodman and Edward Lawe (defendants 
with John Killicke of Doggets, yeoman, and Robert Woodman of Horley, 

Concerning the custom of the complainant's manor of Buckland. 


D-gig Answer (26 Apr. 1620) of Isaac Bowman, defendant, to the bill of 
William Duckmanton. 

Concerning the complainant's employment by the defendant as his 
* drey clearke,' the defendant being a brewer. 

Earl of Dover v. Hilton 

D^ Answer (9 July, 163 1) of Mary Hilton, wife of Henry Hilton, one 
of the defendants to the bill of Henry, Earl of Dover. 

Concerning the debts of Edward Carrell, gent., deceased. The de- 
fendant was living about 8 years since in the house in Aldersgate 
Street of the Earl of Devonshire, her father-in-law. She is styled the 
Lady Hilton in a receipt dated 3 June 1624. 

Delahay V, Winston 

D-J5 Answer (26 Nov. 163 1) of William Winston and Eleanor Winston, 
defendants to the bill of John Delahay. 

Concerning the manor of Trewynt, co. Hereford, of which Robert 
Winston, great grandfather of the defendants, made a settlement by 
indenture 2 Jan. 34 Hen. VIII. before the marriage of his son Watkin 
with Joane Baskervile. A writing is mentioned as dated 5 Ric. II. 
purporting to be an entail of certain lands in Winston to Walter, the 
son of John Winston and the heirs of his body. 


Robert Winston who was seised of the 
manor of Trewyn, co. Hereford, and 
by indenture 2 Jan. 34 Hen. VIII. 
covenanted with Thomas Baskevile, 
esq., to settle the moiety thereof upon 
the marriage of his son and heir with 
Jane Baskevile, and the other moiety 
to the use of himself and his wife 
Maude with remr. to the said Watkin 
and Joan= 

Watkin Winston= Joane Baskervile 

son and heir 

dau. of Thomas Baskervile, 

Thomas Winston, son and heir, 
died about 19 years since 

William Winston, Eleanor Winston, 

son and heir, a a compt. 


Dewell V, Knight and others 

Answers (24 June 1644) of Thomas Knight, Anne his wife, and 
Elizabeth Taylor alias Rogers to the bill of Henry Dewell, complainant. 

Concerning a messuage and copyhold land in Walton-on-Thames. 
The said Elizabeth is relict of one Samuel Taylor, a tenant of the 

Daniell v. Pigott 
D^^g Answer (21 Aug. 1646) of Richard Pigott, gent., defendant (with 
Richard Pigott, grocer) to the bill of John Daniell, citizen and merchant of 

Concerning a lease to the compt. made by the defendant, who was 
servant to Mr. Daniel Harvy of London, merchant. 

Donne v. Kingston and another 

D-^ Bill (10 June 1646) of Roger Donne of London, citizen and 
fletcher, and Jane his wife. 

Answer (19 June 1646) and further answer (6 Nov. 1646) of Sarah 
Kingston and Samuel Snow, the defendants. 



Concerning the estate of William Woofe, fletcher, deceased, whose 
servant the complainant was for many years. The said William by 
his indenture dated in August 1625 settled a rent charge out of his 
houses in Grub Street in St. Giles without Cripplegate upon the 
complainants, who were then about to be married. 

i. ii. 

=William Woofe of London,= Sarah relict=John Kingston 
fletcher. Will dated Jan. and extrix. second husband 
163^ of William of Sarah, now 

Woofe deceased 

Roger Donne=Jane Woofe Anne wife of 

John Gierke 

Deirsley V. Hamond and another 

Bill (18 Feb. 164I-) of Richard Deirsley and Thomas Deirsley his 
son, both of Colchester, maltsters, and John Gower of the same, brewer. 

Answer (4 May 1646) of Thomas Hamond of Great Wallingfield, co. 
Suffolk, yeoman. 

Answer (8 May 1646) of Nicholas Harsenett of Upminster, gent. 

Concerning a debt of the defendant Hamond for which the com- 
plainants were sureties. 

Dary v. Carew and others 

D^jig- Bill (19 June 1646) of William Dary, Mary Dary, Katherine 
Dary, Mary Dary, Jane Dary and Dorcas Dary (all infants within the age of 
1 2 years, being the six children of John Dary of Shalford, co. Surrey, husband- 
man, by Mary his wife, daughter and heir of John Awsten, late of Godalmyn, 
CO. Surrey, deceased, eldest brother to William Awsten, late of Beddington, co. 
Surrey, yeoman) by John Dary their father and guardian. 

Demurrer ( ) of William Lock, gent, (defendant with Sir Francis 

Carewe and his wife, Joshua Tucker, Thomas Darknoll, Gabriel Butler and 

Concerning the estate of William Awsten, deceased, who died at 
Beddington in January last. He had been a servant to the Carew 

DowNE V. Rice and others 
D^ Bill (8 July 1641) of John Downe of Pilton, co. Devon, gent., 
complainant against Philip Rice, Roger Boucher, Richard Rice. 

Concerning a loan for which the complainant was surety with Hugh 
Dallin of Pilton, yeoman. 



DowNES V. Adams and another 
D-ig. Bill (14 Feb. i64f) of John Downes, citizen and haberdasher of 

Answers (23 Feb. 164I) of William Adams and (14 April 1646) of 
Richard Freeman, son of Robert Freeman of London, esquire, deceased. 

Concerning the dealings in silk of Robert Freeman and Thomas 
Chapman, both deceased. 

Drury v. Taylor 
Bill (8 Feb. 164^) of William Drury of March in Ely, son and heir 
of Jeremy Drury late of London, grocer, deceased, complainant against Arthur 

Concerning a capital messuage or farm house with lands in Wisbich 
St. Maryes in Ely, whereof the complainant's father was seised, which 
Jeremy Drury leased the same to Arthur Taylor of Wisbich, gent., the 

Dixon v. Tirrell and others 

D:^^ Bill (27 Nov. 1646) of George Dixon of Mellise, co. Suffolk, gent. 

Answer (i May 1647) of John Woods and Richard Cooper (defendants 
with James Tirrell of Mendham, co. Suffolk, esquire or gent. 

Concerning a mortgage of copyholds in Mellis made by the com- 
plainant to the said Tirrell, as security for a loan of money which he 
needed to discharge parliament rates and other assessments. The 
complainant opens his case by declaring that he is known to be a man 
* very well affected to the proceedings of this present parliament.' The 
complainant was heir to copyholds in the manors of Mellis, St. John's 
and Burgate, on the death of Nicholas Fanner, clerk, who was his 

Dewies v. Allport and others 

D:^ Bill (i I May 1646) of Isaac Dewies of Norton Mandevile, co. Essex, 

Answer (22 May 1646) of William Lock and Joseph Allport. 

Concerning lands called Mayletts etc. in Norton Mandevile, whereof 
John Meade of Thaxted, gent., was seised for life as tenant by courtesy 
with reversion to Thomas Meade his son, son and heir of Grace Meade, 
late wife of the said John. The said John Meade is said to have made 
some estate to one Lawrence Norcott. 

Laurence Norcott of London, 
citizen and haberdasher 

A dau. and coheir married A dau. and coheir married A third dau. and 

to Joseph Allport a to William Lock, cit. and coheir 

scrivener of Cornhill baker of London 



Danby and another v. Mawde and others 
D^L. Bill (i Feb. 164^) of Sir Thomas Danby of Fameley, co. York, 
knight, and Ralph Hopton of Armeley, esq., complainants against Robert Mawde 
of Skelton, esq., William Steile, Dorothy Smith and Mary Smith. 

Concerning the prebend of Gevendale in the cathedral church of Ripon, 
for the purchase of which the complainant Sir Thomas Danby dealt 
with the said Mawde, who pretended to have a good estate of the same 
in fee simple. 

Day and another v. Poynett and another 
Bill (5 May 1646) of Thomas Day of Maighfeild, co. Sussex, 
yeoman, and William Hickmot the elder of Cranbrook, co. Kent, butcher. 

Answer (8 May 1646) of William Poynett of Staplehurst, co. Kent, 
innkeeper, and Richard Brickenden of Cranbrooke, yeoman. 

Concerning a suit in Nov. 1 646 in the ecclesiastical court at Canter- 
bury touching the will of Thomas Munn of Cranbrooke, butcher, 
deceased, admon. of whose goods was granted pendente Hie to Dorothy 
his relict, who afterv-'ards married the complainant Thomas Day, and 
who is now dead. Richard Brickenden was a party to the admon. 
bond dated 26 Sept. 20 Car. I. 

DUNKE V. Baylie 
Bill ( Feb. 164-f-) of William Dunke of Benenden, co. Kent, 


Answer (30 April 1647) of Thomas Baylie of Frittenden, co. Kent, and 
Thomas Baylie the younger (defendants with ) 

Concerning a piece of marshland of the complainants in Ivychurch in 
Romney Marsh, and the customs of the marsh as relating to the 
scouring of ditches. 

Dash v. Wheeler and others 

D-g^ Bill (9 May 1646) of John Dash of Chichester, co. Sussex 

Answer (28 May 1646) of Richard Wheeler, John Hancocke, John 
Harding and Mar)' his wife, all of Newport, and Bartholomew Harris or 
Havant and Anne his wife. 

Concerning the will dated 2 1 Nov. 1 646 of John Hancocke late of 
Chichester, weaver, deceased, who was seised of a garden plot in New- 
port in the Isle of Wight. The said John cam.e to be a soldier in the 
garrison of Chichester and was quartered in the complainant's house 
for a year before he died. By his will he gave the garden plot to the 
complainant, with remainder to Mar}' Dash, aged seven years, the com- 
plainant's daughter, with remainder to Nicholas Dash, complainant's son, 
then aged five years, with remainder to his own right heirs. The said 
Mary Harding alleges that John Hancocke of Newport, yeoman, 
father of the deceased, made a lease 27 April 161 6 of the said plot for 
5 1 years to Richard Wheeler of Newport, weaver, the said Mar^-'s 


former husband. The said Mary is extrix. of her said former husband 
and married John Harding ten years since. The lease was given by 
John Harding and his wife to Anne Wheeler, dau. of the said Mary, 
who died two years after the gift, upon which the plot was given to 
Richard Wheeler, eldest son of the said Richard Wheeler, deceased, by 
the said Anne. The said Anne Harris says that she is of kin to John 
Hancocke the son, who about two years since left in her hands certain 
writings, she being then a widow living at Havant. The defendant 
John Hancocke, eldest son known to be living of John Hancocke who 
granted the lease to Richard Wheeler, hath in his custody a deed whereby 
Richard Hancocke his grandfather purchased the garden plot. This 
defendant does not know whether his elder brother Richard Hancocke, 
whose abode is of late beyond sea, be dead or no. 

DocTON and others v. Langford 
Bill (18 June 1632) of John Docton, Peter Sander, Hugh Nicholl 

the elder, Hugh Nicholl the younger, Hugh Nicholl, Thomas Prist, William 

Churton, John Vine, and Justinian May. 

Answer (2 Oct. 1632) of Emanuel Langford, esquire, and (5 Oct. 1632) 

of Elizabeth, Priscilla and Grace Langford and likewise of Mary and Julyan 

Langford (defendants with Dorothy, Katherine and Amy Langford. 

Concerning the will of Katherine Gary of Clovelley, co. Devon, 
widow, deceased (relict of George Carie, deceased), who had four 
children, viz. Henry, Mary, Alice and Julyan. She married the said 
Mary to John Arundel of Trerise, esquire, the said Alice to Emanuel 
Langford, gent., and the said Julyan to Thomas Arundel, esquire 
(brother of John). She is alleged by the complainants to have made 
a will 30 Dec. last past, making the said Henry Carie (who hath lived 
many years in London) and John Arundel her exors. to whom she 
gave all her goods. The complainants were purchasers of part of the 
goods. The said Alice Langford hath by Emanuel Langford fifteen 
children. The said Katherine had often suits at law with William 
Cary, esq., her son-in-law. She died on New Year's Day last. Henry 
Cary her son * for some unkind cariage and behaviour conceived by his 
said mother towardes her ' had not been for many years admitted to 
her presence. The defendant Langford says that the widow Cary 
gave by deed of gift nearly all of her goods to eight of his daughters — 
Elizabeth, Priscilla, Grace, Mary, Julyan, Dorothy, Catherine and 
Amy Langford. 

George Cary of Clovelly, esq. = Katherine, relict 

Henry Cary 

Mary wife of John 
Arundel of Trerise, 

Emanuel = Alice 

Julyan wife of 
Arundel, esq. 

eight sons 

Elizabeth Priscilla Grace Mary Julyan Dorothy Catherine Amy 



Davies V. Davies and another 
D-J^ Bill (24 May 1641) of Hugh Davies of Wrexham, co. Denbigh, 

Answer (25 June 164.1) of Gwen Davies, widow, and Humfrey Lloyd, 

Concerning a settlement of messuages and lands in Wrexham, made by 
the complainant's father David ap John Robert of Wrexham, co. 
Denbigh, gent. By indenture dated 2 June 1 3 Car. I. made between 
(i) the said David ap John Robert, (ii) John Everton of Chester, mer- 
chant, and Edward Nicholas of Wrexham, (iii) Bartholomew Davies 
(second son of David ap John Robert), (iv) Philip Davis (third son), 
and (v) John Davies (fourth son), the said David ap John Robert 
settled a messuage and lands etc. in Wrexham to the use of the said 
Bartholomew and Gwen his wife, after the death of the said David and 
Elizabeth his wife, with rem"^ to the heirs of the body of the said 
Bartholomew, with rem*" to the complainant. The said Bartholomew 
survived his parents and died in November last past without issue. 

Davies v. Doulben and others 
Dgig Bill (28 May 1641) of John Davies the elder, citizen and cloth- 
worker of London, and John Davies and Henry Davies, infants under the ,age 
of 1 8 years, children of the aforesaid John Davies by Margaret his wife. 

Answer (7 July 1641) of William Doulben, esquire (a defendant with John 
Doulben and Henry Lloyd, gendemen). 

Concerning the will of David Doulben, Lord Bishop of Bangor, dated 
22 Nov. 1632 by which he gave 20/. to each descendant of his father 
and mother who should be living at the time of his death. The 
defendants are executors of this will with its codicil. The com- 
plainant's wife Margaret was one of the daughters of Henry Doulben, 
one of the sons of the said Robert Winn Doulben and Jane. The 
defendants assert that there is not enough money at present in their 
hands to discharge the legacies to the complainant's two sons. William 
Doulben the defendant is a brother, and his fellow executors nephews 
of the said Bishop of Bangor. They have paid 20/. legacies to Jane, 
Katherine, David, Elizabeth, Luce, Margaret and Jane Doulben, to 
Jane and Katherine Lloyd, to Jane Hughes and Hugh Peirs, to one of 
Morris Lloyd's children and to Hugh and Robert Doulben. The like 
sum is yet to be paid to Hugh, William and Jane Stoddard, Hugh 
Lloyd, Mary Hughes, Dorothy Hughes, Jane Doulben, John Doulben, 
Luce Doulben, David Doulben, Jane Doulben, Mary Doulben, Emme 
Doulben, John Doulben, David Doulben, Richard Doulben, Hum- 
phrey Doulben, William Doulben, John Doulben, William Doulben, 
David Doulben, Richard Doulben, Henry Davies and John Davies, 
Henry Lloyd, and to two of John Conway's children. 

DuTTON V. Lloyd and another 
D-g^ Bill (30 June 163 1) of S'' Ralph Dutton of Standish, co. Glouc, 


Answer (5 Oct. 163 1) of Thomas Lloyd of Wheatenhurst ^/zjj Whittnister, 
CO. Glouc, gent., and of Thomas Beard, yeoman. 

Concerning the complainant's water mills in Moreton Valence and in 
Sawle in the parish of Standish. 

Dyer z>. Androwe and others 
DgV Bill (12 May 1632) of John Dyer of Probus, co. Cornwall, yeoman. 
Answer (2 Oct. 1632) of John Androwe and Philippe his wife, and Robert 
Bone and Jane his wife. 

Concerning a tenement called Trewyns in Probus parcel of the manor 
of Wolvedon, which tenement, according to the complainant's case, 
Francis Tregyan, esquire, since deceased, by his deed indented in 
Jan. 14 Elizab., leased to the complainant, together with Richard Dyer 
his elder brother and one Joan Score, Richard's servant, for their 
three lives. The said Joan afterwards matched herself without her 
master's consent with one William Ferrys and had issue a daughter, 
and although only a lessee in trust, entered with her husband upon 
her part of the tenement, thereby oppressing the complainant and his 
said brother. Not content with this, about July 22 Elizab. she with 
her husband and daughter took a new lease in reversion of the said 
tenement from Sir George Cary, knight. After this the said Richard 
Dyer died, the complainant being then young and within years. 
When the complainant entered upon the tenement he was beaten and 
wounded by the said William Ferrys, and being vexed by suits at law 
was afterwards forced to submit the matter to the arbitrament of two 
men * mostly of his the said Ferris owne choyse.' The defendants 
allege that Joan Score married with the good liking of Richard Dyer. 
William Ferrys = Joan Shore relict 

whose will is 
dated in July 

and extrix. died in 
June 1628 

John Androwe = Philippe Ferrys, only child, 
extrix. of her mother's will 

Robert Bone = Jane Androwe 

Dyke and another v. Dyke 
D-^ Bill (27 June 163 1 ) of Jeremy Dyke and John Dodson, executors 
<of William Dyke, late of London, clerk, deceased. 

Answer (23 July 163 1) of John Dyke of London, merchant. 

Concerning the will, dated 2 July 161 8, of Mary Dyke, wife of the 
said William Dyke, clerk, and formerly wife of John Waddis, whereby 
she gave to the defendant for the good of William Dyke her husband 
her leasehold dwelling house in Aldgate, charged with an annuity 
to Katherine Jackson her sister. The said William Dyke made a will 
27 July 16 19, whereof his son Jeremy and the said John Dodson who 
had married his daughter Elizabeth were executors with John Waddis 
and Roger Harris. The said William's other sons are named — 
Zachary, Nathaniel and Joseph Dyke, of whom the said Joseph is 
now dead. 


Dell v. Shackley 
D-^ Bill (20 Nov. 1632) of Joshua Dell of Saltash, co. Cornwall, 

Answer (29 Nov. 1632) ot Andrew Shackley of Saltash, merchant. 
Concerning certain dealings in cloves. 

Dyos v. Kynaston and others 

Bill (14 June 163 1 ) of Richard Dyos, cousin and heir of Nicholas 
Dyos, deceased. 

Answer (26 Sep. 163 1 at Ruyton, co. Salop) of Thomas Kynaston, gent., 
Gilbert Fownes, gent., bailiff to the Lord Craven of the manor of Ruyton, and 
Edward Davies alias Butcher. 

Concerning matters arising out of the suit which the said Nicholas 
Dyos brought in this court against Jeffrey Davyes, John Meyres and 
others touching a burgage in Ruyton, co. Salop, which the said Nicholas 
claimed by descent from Richard Dyos his father. The said Nicholas 
was uncle to the complainant, and died without issue about seven 
years past. The defendant Thomas Kynaston is son and heir of 
Richard Kynaston, deceased, and alleges that Richard Dyos the 
grandfather conveyed the burgage on 16 April 39 Elizabeth to his 
younger son George Dyos, who was then about to marry Elizabeth 
Hall, which Elizabeth having died without issue, the said George 
conveyed the burgage 20 July 44 Elizabeth to the said Richard 
Kynaston. The defendant Kynaston names his uncle Thomas 

Richard Dyos 

Nicholas Dyos 

Richard Dyos 

Richard Dyos, 
only son and heir 

George Dyos 
married to Elizabeth 
Hall, who was dead 
without issue by him 
before 20 July 44 Eliz. 

Dammerell V. Holt 

Dgi^ Bill (11 Oct. 163 1 ) ot James Dammerell alias Dammeron or 
Lymehouse in Stepney, mariner. 

Answer (19 Oct. 1631) of Lawrence Holt, citizen and cloth worker of 

Concerning a tenement and land in Packfield, part of the estate ot 
Elizabeth Cox of Great Yarmouth, widow, who died seised of lands in 
Packfield, Kirklie, Gysland, Carlton and Covell, co. Suffolk, leaving a 
will dated in Nov, 44 Eliza, which was proved in the Commissary 
Court of Norwich by the exors. who were her son Arthur and her 
son-in-law John Felton, uncle in law to the complainant. The said 
Felton was brother to Daniel Felton, citizen and grocer of London. 



. . . Dammerell = Elizabeth, who = . . . Cox 

alias Dammeron 
of Great Yar- 
mouth, mariner 

survived both her 

Arthur Dammerell = . . . died soon after 
alias Dammeron | her husband 

James Dammerell alias 
Dammeron of Lymehouse, 


D-gY Bill (5 Nov. 163 1) of Elizabeth Dolben, relict and extrix. ot 

William Dolben, D.D., deceased. 

Answer (22 Nov. 163 1) of Sir Thomas Middleton, knight (defendant with 

John Chambers and Anne his wife). 

Concerning a bill in Chancery exhibited by the said William Dolben 
in Easter term last against the present defendants. The said Dolben 
was executor of the will and codicil of William Middleton, a merchant 
of London, which William, together with Sir Thomas Middleton, 
knight and alderman of London, lent 2000/. unto Pryamus Lloyde 
of Marrington, co. Salop, esquire, who with his son and heir 
apparent Richard Lloyde, by indenture dat. 14 March 5 Car. L 
mortgaged lands in Marrington to the Middletons. The said Anne 
is alleged by her husband to be sister and next heir of William 
Middleton, deceased. The defendant Sir Thomas is son and heir of 
the said Sir Thomas the alderman, who is now dead. 


D^ Bill (13 Feb. 164-I) of Anne Dodington, widow, relict of John 
Dodington of Breamore, co. Southampton, esquire, deceased. 

Answer (2 May 1645) of Edward Dodington, esquire, younger brother of 
the said John. 

The complainant recites that in a treaty of marriage between herself 
and her late husband in Feb. 19 Car. L in consideration of her 
portion of 4000/. the said John agreed to assure to her for life for her 
jointure manors and lands of the value of 800/. yearly, and also the 
said John agreed to leave her, if she survived him, either his dwelling 
house in the close of Sarum, or some other house lit for her quality, 
with its goods and household stuff. John Dodington died 5 Sept. 
1644. The defendant says that the complainant, who was dau. of Sir 
Henry Wallopp, knight, deceased, and sister to Robert Wallopp, 
esquire, was married to his brother 14 March 164 J. The said John 
left a will dated i July 1644. The defendant denies that the 
promised jointure was of the amount of 800/. yearly, or that his 
brother promised to leave his widow the house in the close of Sarum. 
The said John gave the said house by will to his only child Anne 
Dodington. The defendant names Sir William Dodington, knight, 



deceased, as father of himself and the said John. He also names Mr. 
Hoby, Mr. [? John] Buckley and Mr. Hanham, as brothers-in-law of 
himself and the said John. 

Douglas v. Norwood and others 
D-gi^ Bill (4 Nov. 1645) of William Douglas of London, merchant, 
using the trade of a merchant to Virginia and elsewhere. 

Answer and demurrer (11 Nov. 1645) of William Thompson and William 
Webster (defendants with Thomas Norwood and Nicholas Wallis). 

Concerning the debts of the said Norwood to the complainant. 

Davenport v. Franke 
D-^ Bill (12 May 1645) of James Davenport of St. Martins in the fields, 
esquire, executor of the will of Joan Wells, widow, deceased. 
Answer (16 May 1645) of Sir Leventhorpe Franke, knight. 

Concerning a mortgage by the defendant and Dame Lucy his wife of 
copyholds in the manor of Hallingbury Bourchiers in Essex to the said 
Joan Wells, of whom the defendant had taken up 500/. at interest. 

Dunn v. Howland and others 
D-^ Bill (11 Nov. 1645) of Edward Dunn of St. George's, Southwark, 
CO. Surrey, combmaker, and Martha his wife. 

Answer (19 Nov. 1645) of Sir John Howland, knight (defendant with 
George Duncombe, esquire, and other unnamed). 

Concerning messuages and lands in Streatham, copyholds of the manor 
of Totingbecke, co. Surrey, whereof Martin Cann, citizen and cloth- 
worker of London, was seised, 

Martin Cann, citizen — Elizabeth, relict, said 

and clothworker of 
London, living 16 

to have made a will 
41 Elizab. 

Timothy Cann, aged Thomas = Elizabeth Cann, presented 

26 years at hie sister's Hacker as dead before a court held 
death 16 Oct. 21 Elizab. 



John Fludd = Elizabeth 

Martin Fludd, Christopher Fludd, = Margaret 

died s.p. died when his Feild 

daughter was aged 

about 3 years 

Edward Dunn = 
the com- 

Pedigree Supplement 


To face page 142 


Sir David Pollock, 
Chief Justice of 
Bombay, 1 780-1 847 

Sir Jonathan Frederi 
Bart., Lord Chief B 
Exchequer, 1783-18 

George Kennet 
Pollock, solicitor, 

John Curwood 
Pollock, bar- 
rister, b. 1 812 

Charles Mason Arthur Becher Alfred Atkinson Sir William 

Innes Pollock, 
Clerk of the 
Crown at Bombay 

Pollock, bar- 

Pollock, solicitor, 

b. 1849 

Eve yn 
b. 1863 

Frederick Pollock, 
2nd Bart., Queen's 
Remembrancer and 
Senior Master of 
the Supreme Court 
of Judicature, 

Sir Frederick 
Pollock, 3rd 
Bart., barrister 
and Corpus 
Professor of 
Editor of the 
Lavf Reports, 
b. 1845 

b. 1850 


Sir George Pollock, Bart., G.C.B., John Henry Pollock, 

G.C.S.L, a field marshal in the Registrar London Court 

army, 178 6- 1872 of Bankruptcy 

Jeorge Frederick 
*ollock, Senior 
/laster of the 
upreme Court 
f Judicature and 
Jueen's Remem- 
rancer, b. 1821 

Sir Charles 
Edward Pollock, 
a Baron of the 
Exchequer, and 
a judge of the 
High Court of 
Justice, b. 1823, 
d. 1897 



b. 1861 

of the 
of Judi- 

Sir Frederick 
Richard Pol- 
lock, K.C. S.I. 
General, b. 

b. 1874 

b. 1864 






b. 1867 












Referee of 



b. 1 841 

b. 1864 

Charles Harold 
Frederick Warren 
Pollock, Pollock, 
barrister, barris- 
b. 1866 ter, b. 






ter, b. 










Pollock, Pollock, 
solicitor, solicitor, 
b. 1865 b. 1865 

Seal of Richard Nevill, Earl of Warwick. 

Seal of Richard Nevill, Earl of Warwick. 


THE seal of Richard, Earl of Warwick, better known as 
the King-maker, of which an illustration is given opposite, 
is believed to be the only impression of which the existence is 
known. It is attached to a document of no intrinsic impor- 
tance, which bears the autograph of the earl, ' R. Warrewyk,' 
and of which the date is Feb. i, 1465 (4 Edw. IV.)^ This 
document, with its seal, was known to the great Camden, 
which suggests that even in his day it was deemed remarkable 
and rare. It appears to have been lost sight of subsequently 
till re-discovered by myself in a loft above the stables at Birch 
Hall, the residence of the Right Hon. James Round, who has 
allowed it to be photographed for ^he Ancestor, It may be 
remembered that among the documents similarly found at 
Belvoir in a loft over the stables, by Sir Henry Maxwell-Lyte, 
was one which similarly bore the King-maker's autograph. 
The impression, fortunately, is a very fine one, every link in the 
chain of the muzzled bear of Warwick being clearly visible, as 
is also the ermine of the Newburgh chevron and the 
differencing of the label on the coat of Nevill. Mr. St. John 
Hope has drawn my attention to the fact that Drummond's 
Nohle Families contains a poor engraving of the seal apparently 
from another impression, but the photograph of it which is here 
given is taken from a cast specially made to secure exactitude 
of illustration. 

A short chart pedigree is needed to explain the description 
which follows. 

Isabel Despencer=Richard Beauchamp Richard Nevill=Alice Montague 

(2nd wife) senior 
coheiress of the 

Earl of Warwick 
K.G. d. 1439 

Earl of Salis- 
bury K.G. 
d. 1460 

dau. and heir of 
Thomas Earl of 
Salisbury d. circ. 

Anne Beau- 
champ even- 
tual heiress 

Richard Nevill 
son and heir 
*The King-maker* 
d. 1471 

^ It thus belongs to the close of his period of greatest power, during which 
he was * much more prominent than the King/ while * foreign observers looked 

on him as the real ruler of England.' 




The special interest of this fine seal consists in its combina- 
tion, in marshalling, crests, and supporters, of the King-maker's 
paternal earldom of Salisbury with his wife's earldom of 
Warwick. The muzzled bear of Warwick forms the dexter 
supporter, the griffin of Salisbury the sinister, unless this 
griffin is the sinister supporter shown on the seal of his wife's 
father's arms facing the muzzled bear. So also with the 
crests. In the last volume of The Ancestor illustrations were 
given (pp. 170, 174) of the garter-plates, from Mr. St. John 
Hope's book, of the earl's father Richard (Nevill), Earl of 
Salisbury, and of his wife's father Richard (Beauchamp), Earl of 
Warwick, and their seals are here reproduced, by Mr. Hope's 
permission, from the same source. It will be observed that both 
their crests figure on the King-maker's seal — on the dexter side 
the swan's head, the crest of the Earl of Warwick, on the sinister 
the sitting griffin of the Earl of Salisbury. 

The marshalling of the arms is more complicated. The 
earl's father Richard Nevill, who was a younger son, having 
married the heiress of the Earls of Salisbury, and becoming, 
in consequence. Earl of Salisbury himself, placed her arms 
(Montague quartering Monthermer) in the first and fourth 
quarters of his shield, relegating his own paternal coat, Nevill 
differenced with a label gobony, to the second and third. 
But on one of his two seals here illustrated his paternal coat 
is also shown on a separate escutcheon on the dexter side, and 
that of Longespee, Earl of Salisbury (of an entirely distinct 
line), on the sinister. 

But his contemporary the Earl of Warwick, father of the 
King-maker's wife, adopted another principle. In accordance 
with modern practice he placed on his own shield, which was 
Beauchamp quartering Newburgh (the arms of the earldom of 
Warwick an escutcheon of pretence with the arms of his 
second wife, the sole heiress of the Despencers, who were 
senior coheirs of the Clares, Earls of Gloucester. It should be 
noted that in her case the chevrons of Clare take precedence 
in the first quarter of her paternal coat of Despencer. 

It was probably because she brought to her husband land 
only that her arms are merely placed on an escutcheon of 
pretence, instead of being incorporated as the first quarter of 

^ The earldom of Warwick descended from Newburgh [Neufbourg] to 
Beauchamp through Mauduit. I describe the above coat as * the arms of the 
Earldom of Warwick' because it is variously attributed (see Papworth, p. 374). 


the shield, as would doubtless have been done if she had 
brought him an earldom. The escutcheon of pretence is 
similarly seen on the shield of the earl's contemporary. Lord 
Montague, a younger brother of the King-maker, who so 
dealt with the arms of his wife, an Ingoldsthorpe heiress. 

Now, how were all these coats, seven in number, to be 
marshalled on the King-maker's seal ? His equestrian seal, of 
which the matrix, taken, it is said, from his body when he fell 
at Barnet field, is now in the British Museum, displays a 
peculiar arrangement. The photograph of it here given, from 
a cast taken for the purpose, shows the arms of Nevill (differ- 
enced) alone on his shield, and the crest of Beauchamp alone 
on his helm, while the trappers of his horse display in front 
the arms of the earldom of Salisbury and those of the earldom 
of Warwick behind. But on the heraldic seal we see that he 
has, broadly speaking, adopted the same principle as his father; 
that is to say, he has given to his wife's arms the place of 
honour in the first and fourth quarters, while relegating his 
own to the second and third. But instead of placing the 
whole of his own in each of these quarters he has placed in 
the second his mother's arms, those of the earldom of Salisbury, 
and in the third his father's, namely Nevill differenced. I doubt 
if there was any reason for this beyond the obvious difficulty, 
indeed the impossibility, of engraving his mother's quarterly 
coat in what would have been not a fourth but a sixteenth 
part of the shield. When we turn to the arrangement of his 
wife's arms we are confronted by a difficulty of another kind. 
According at least to our modern notions, the quarterly coat 
of her father and the quarterly coat of her mother should have 
been combined in a quarter showing the four coats. But this 
simple arrangement was not adopted. Two of the coats were 
marshalled quarterly in the first quarter, and the other two 
quarterly in the fourth. But instead of keeping to the right 
combinations, Beauchamp quartering Newburgh, which was her 
father's coat, and Clare quartering Despencer, which was her 
mother's coat, Beauchamp was unnaturally made to quarter the 
arms of the Clares, and Newburgh, still more unnaturally, to 
quarter those of the Despencers, a house with which the 
Newburghs had nothing to do. 

The interest of all this is that it shows us the designer 
feeling his way, as it seems to me, towards a system of 
quartering. He wished to assign to the wife's arms the first 



and fourth quarters as the place of honour, but he could not 
adopt what to our minds was the simplest way of doing so. 
So he picked out for his first quarter the first quarter of her 
father's coat and the first quarter of her mother's, as being the 
most important, and relegated the others to the fourth quarter. 
The result, heraldically, made nonsense, but at least it is more 
interesting nonsense than the fearful monstrosities of later days 
in which families have vied with one another in constructing a 
kind of heraldic ^ crazy quilt.' For every one of the coats 
quartered by Richard Nevill was that of a family actually 
represented either by himself or by his wife. 

But even as ' the last of the barons ' was the first, it has 
been well said, who possessed a train of artillery, so we trace 
even in his seal a falling off from the heraldic art, still medie- 
val in spirit, seen in those of the previous generation here 
illustrated. And in his arms as given on the Rows Roll we 
note a sharper fall ; the new heraldry is already rudely dis- 
placing the old. 

The picture from the Rows Roll, made in the time of 
Richard III., shows a lamentable falling off from the armory 
of the seals, an armory speaking of facts, of lordships and high 
seigniories in the grasp of the great earls. The arms upon 
the Rows Roll show the coat of Montagu, quartered in one 
case with Monthermer and Nevill and in the other with 
Monthermer, Nevill and Francis, impaling a welter of coats 
in which quarters for 'the Erles Warrewyk in the Britons 
dayes ' and * Syr Guy at the batell of Wynchester,' when he 
smote the giant Dane, find themselves shouldering the actualities 
of Beauchamp, Tony, Despenser and Clare. 

At the lady's feet lies the bear of Beauchamp, at her lord's 
the Nevill bull with the Monthermer eagle perched on his 
quarters. It will be noted that although heraldry as a silly 
science is beginning to feel its way, the good Rows who had 
seen many a knight in his plates does not attempt to fill the 
shield upon the earl's arm with more quarters than those of 
Montagu and Monthermer.^ 

One more point. In the legend of this seal there is but 
one addition to the style ' Earl of Warwick,' and that is 
' dominus de Bergevveny.' ^ The latter was a territorial title, 

1 These two paragraphs describing the illustration from the Roll are 
contributed by the Editor. 

^ This is distinctly the reading in the legend, but it is perhaps an engraver's 
error, for in the document the form of the name is * Bergevenny.' 

The Rows Roll. 

Seal of Richard Nevill, Earl of Salisbury. 

Seal of John Nevii.l, Lord Mon tague. 


the earl's wife having succeeded her father and brother in the 
possession of Abergavenny under a family entail. On his 
equestrian seal the secondary title is ^ domini Glamorgancie et 
Morgan'/ Glamorgan having descended from the Clares 
through his wife's ancestors the Despencers, the arms of both 
which families are so prominent on his seals. The same 
double style is found on a seal of his father-in-law Richard, 
Earl of Warwick (1436), in right of his wife Isabel Despencer, 
whose ancestor Edward, Lord Despencer, had styled himself 
Lord of Glamorgan and Morgannock in his will (1375). 
Neither in the heraldic nor in the equestrian seal is the earl 
styled Earl of Salisbury, although in the document to which 
the former is attached he adopts the quasi-regal style ^ Nos 
Ricardum Neville Comitem Warrewici et Sar'.' He had 
succeeded to the latter dignity some five years before, at his 
father's death, in 1460. 






IN our first number we spoke of the value for family 
history of the information which is steadily being brought 
to light in the noble Calendars of Rolls now being issued by 
the Public Record Office. The latest volume of the Close 
Rolls Calendar (1279-88) contains the abstract of the following 
interesting deed : — 

Enrolment of grant by Stephen de Grandon, brother and heir of Ralph 
de Grandon, to Laura, daughter of Laurence de Scaccario, whom Ralph 
married at St. Botulph's church, Colchester, on the morrow of the Epiphany 
6 Edward (7 Jan. 1277/8), of all the manor of Levelaund, co, Kent, and 
all the manor of Bolemere, co. Essex, with which manors Ralph dowered 
Laura at the door of the church when he married her : to have for life in 
dower in accordance with Ralph's deed. 

On turning to the standard Count}^ Histories, Hasted's 
Kent and Morant's Essex, we can find no mention of the 
Grandon family under either of the places named. But when 
we examine closely Morant's account of Bulmer, we find that 
one of its manors was named Grandon-hall, though he could 
neither explain its name, or tell us anything about its early 
history. This was clearly the manor referred to in the deed 
above. So too, though Hasted's account appears to preclude 
any connexion between the Grandon family and Leveland, 
the Archaologia Cantiana (xii. 218) contains a list of the 
'Holders of Fees in Kent, 38 Henry III.' (1253-4), in 
which we read that Ralph de ' Crendone ' holds one fee in 
Levelonde of the Archbishop (of Canterbury). 

Laurence ' de Scaccario ' was sheriff of Essex from the 4th 
to the 7th Edward I., and died 12 Edward I. (1283-4) seised 
of the manor of Twinsted, which parish is adjacent to Bulmer. 
St. Botolph's church, at the door of which, in accordance with 
the practice of the time, the dower was granted, belonged to 
the Augustinian Priory of St. Botolph, and its ruins are now 
among the sights of Colchester. It is of course extremely 
rare to find the place and date of a marriage in this class of 
life recorded at so early a date. 



AMONG our great collections of local records still await- 
ing exploration that of the Borough of Colchester occupies 
a leading place. But an admirable start has been made in the 
volume which is the subject of this notice, and for which we 
are indebted to the industry and the enterprise of Mr. Gurney 
Benham, who has himself filled the mayor's chair in the ancient 
borough on the Colne. The miscellaneous documents entered 
on the folios of the Red Paper Book illustrate not only muni- 
cipal institutions, but the social life of the old world from the 
days of Henry III. to those of Edward VI. Colchester was 
in no sense one of those towns which owed its origin to a 
religious house, but the great Benedictine Abbey of St. John, 
on the rising ground to the south beyond the Roman walls, 
looms large throughout the pages of the Red Paper Book, For 
town and abbey were ever at strife, wrangling most as to juris- 
diction, racing even to hold inquests on corpses found on 
disputed ground. To the accident of a burglarious entry 
eifected through the refectory window in 1345 we are in- 
debted for a knowledge of the fact that the monks were not 
content with wooden mazers only, for ten silver cups and 
twenty-five silver spoons formed part of the booty. St. John's 
was not the only religious house at Colchester, as we are 
reminded by a record which is of interest to the genealogist. 
This is a list of the inhabitants of Colchester who took the 
oath under the Act of Succession in 1534, an oath which was 
made an instrument for testing the loyalty of the nation. In 
each parish the rector's name is followed by those of his parish- 
ioners, which gives a useful clue for searching parish registers. 
At the end of this list are the names of the canons of St. 
Botolph's Priory and the monks of St. John's who took the 
oath, a matter, we may explain, of some consequence, for it 
involved the rejection of the Pope's authority. 

The genealogist will also welcome the long list of burgesses 

^ The Red Paper Book oj Colchester. By W. Gurney Benham (privately 



admitted to the freedom of the borough in the fifteenth cen- 
tury, and such documents as the wills of John Elys (1485) 
and Matthew Rede (15 17). The former directs that three 
images, those of St. Helen, St. Margaret, and St. John the 
Baptist (his own name was John, and his wife's Margaret, while 
St. Helen was the patron saint of the town), should be placed on 
the east gate ; and the latter is a long document mentioning 
testator's children, among whom are ' Margarete Aleyn ' and 
' yonge Margarete.' Of special interest is the long account of 
the dispute as to the will of William Bury in 1492. 'John 
Dixwell gentylman and Kateryne his wifFe, doughter and heir 
of William Bury of Colchester gentilman,' complained to the 
bailiffs that they were wronged in the matter of this will. 
Their witnesses deposed that, about twenty years before, they 
were present by William's deathbed when the man of law 
arrived in the person of ' oone Benett Popy, a lettrid man, 
and being in singlier favour with the said William Bury,' who 
came bringing 'pen, ynke, and papier with hym.' But 
William appears to have died before he had done more than 
bequeath his body to be buried in St. John's Abbey ' besid 
the grave of his secound wiffe,' and it was alleged that his will 
which was entered on the court rolls of the borough was not 
genuine. Hence the complaints of his daughter and her hus- 
band as ' like to suffre wrongfull disheritauns of maners, lands 
and tenements.' Among the documents here printed are 
some which prove clearly that the freedom of the borough 
could be claimed, in the fifteenth century, by any man born 
and baptized within its borders. In case of dispute evidence 
as to the christening was called for, and the godfathers ques- 

The passion for litigation in Tudor times and the mischiet 
it often wrought receive curious illustration in the tale of 
Nicholas Moore and his doings (1548). This man was a 
scrivener, who practised with his clients to stir up ' very many 
old and blynd titles and suytes,' trusting to champerty for his 
gains. So effectually did he set the whole town by the ears 
that its ' ruyne ' could only be averted by ' the infinit mercy 
of God,' and by promptly expelling Nicholas from the 
borough, a measure resolved on at a special assembly of the 
whole Council. Mr. Benham's task has been no easy one, for 
the volume, though now well cared for, has suffered much in 
the past, and the text is in a bad state. But his patience has 


triumphed over many difficulties, and he has further earned 
our gratitude by a copious index to the names of places and 
persons. We trust that this volume, of which only seventy- 
five copies have been issued, may be followed by others 
dealing with the contents of the borough record-room. 



The north-western counties of Cumberland, Westmor- 
land and Lancashire present to the historian greater difficulty in 
their early history than any others. For it was not till well on 
into the twelfth century that they assumed their present forms 
and definitely became counties. A further complication is in- 
troduced in the case of Lancashire by the difference between 
the county as a geographical expression and the great fief 
named after it owing to community of feudal tenure. Even 
to-day this complication is roughly represented by the co-exist- 
ence of the County of Lancashire and the sovereign's Duchy 
of Lancaster. 

Mr. Farrer, whose work on Lancashire fines and whose 
edition of the Cockersand Cartulary have already proved him a 
notable recruit to that band of workers who have done so much 
for the history of the north of England, has set himself here 
to show us what it is possible to learn from the sure evidence 
of records as to Lancashire lords and lands for some hundred, 
and fifty years after the date of Domesday. The larger portion 
of the volume consists of the text of the Pipe Rolls, with Mr. 
Farrer's notes on them ; for instead of publishing the bare text 
as Mr. Hodgson did for Northumberland, and Mr. Hodgson 
Hinde for Cumberland and Westmorland, he has added ela- 
borate annotations. Stapleton did this for the early Rolls of 
Normandy, but made his work a distracting one to use by 
separating the introduction from the Rolls. Mr. Farrer has 
wisely appended his notes to the roll of each year, so that they 

^ 'The Lancashire Pipe Rolls 0/ 1 1 30 and 1 1 5 5-1 2 1 6, //^^ Latin text extended and 
notes added ; also early Lancashire charters of the period from the reign of William 
Rufus to thai of King John. By William Farrer (Liverpool : Young & Sons). 


are given in a form most convenient to the student. But the 
second portion of the volume is the most novel in conception. 
Eyton, it is true, did something of the kind for the William 
Salt Society in his ' Staffordshire Chartulary/ but it is doubtful 
if so remarkable a collection of charters as this has been made 
for any county. Having worked in the same field myself I 
rejoice to see the importance and illustrative value of these 
documents for county history recognized, and am glad to find 
that Mr. Farrer has followed the method I adopted in my 
Early Charters (1888).^ 

In a brief introduction to the volume Mr. Farrer sketches 
for his readers the history of the county down to the reign of 
Henry III. ; and an appendix at the end of the Pipe Rolls con- 
tains an analysis of the manors constituting the Honour, with 
their issues and their fate. From the striking coloured map 
which forms the frontispiece to the volume, and depicts the 
feudal tenures of the county in 12 12, to the noble index at its 
close, the contents are a very treasure-house for the topographer 
and the genealogist. 

The history of the present county in early times is briefly 
recapitulated in Mr. Farrer's introduction. On the eve of the 
Norman Conquest it was divided into two portions, of which 
the southern was known as the land ' between Mersey and 
Ribble,' while the northern extended from the Ribble to 
the Duddon (which was then the boundary of Cumbria), and 
included what was afterwards to become, as the barony of 
Kendal, a part of Westmorland. This northern portion had 
been attached to the kingdom of Northumbria, was held by 
Harold's brother. Earl Tostig of Northumberland, and is sur- 
veyed in Domesday Book under Yorkshire. An exceedingly 
difficult problem is presented to the Domesday student by the 
vast fief of Roger ' the Poitevin ' and its tenure at the time of 
the Survey. Mr. Farrer's conclusions on this subject are as 
follows : — 

Upon the subjugation of the north by the Conqueror, all Lancashire from 
the Mersey to the Duddon was bestowed upon Roger, son of Roger de Mont- 
gomery, commonly called * the Poitevin,' who also received Bowland and a large 
estate in Craven, in the county of York. Count Roger was probably put in 
possession in the year 1068. Within a few years he was dispossessed, on account 
of his participation in the rebellious acts of Duke Robert of Normandy during 

^ In the Pipe Roll Society's publications, namely that of printing at the foot 
of each charter notes on its contents, its witnesses, and its probable date. 



the period 1077-8. Subsequently William Rufus returned to him his estates 
in Lancashire, or the greater part of them. . . . In 1 102 he again adhered to 
Duke Robert . . . with the result that he and his father's house were finally 
banished from the kingdom and his estates confiscated. 

Domesday, however, speaks of a portion of his vast estates 
as if they were still in his possession, while another portion is 
entered as having formerly been his. Mr. Farrer holds that ' it 
was during the twelve years which followed the Count's final 
expulsion that Henry I. incorporated the Honour of Lancaster,' 
but this statement and the others by which it is immediately 
followed appear to me to be open to some question. Let us 
take them in order. 

[l] In 1 1 14— 6 the newly incorporated Honour with a quota of service to 
the military host of some sixty odd knights, was bestowed by King Henry upon 
his nephew Stephen who had already succeeded to the Comtecs of Boulogne 
and Mortain. 

Here we touch national history, to say nothing of the de- 
volution of mighty fiefs. Yet what is our sole evidence ? 
Merely the Lindsey Survey, which proves that Stephen was, 
at its date, already in possession of the lands which Roger had 
held in that district. It does not tell us at what date Henry 
bestowed them on him, and its own date is matter of question ; 
for though Mr. Eyton and Mr. Chester Waters had estab- 
lished it to their satisfaction as in 4-6, it would be more 
correct to assign it to 1115-8.^ Moreover, Stephen had 
certainly not succeeded at that early date to the comte of Bou- 
logne (the heiress of which he married) ; and this correction 
affects, we shall find, the date of one at least of Mr. Farrer's 
documents. To continue : — 

[2] Count Stephen, thus holding the Honour by his uncle's gift, continued 
in possession after his accession to the Crown in 1135, until the troublous 
period of 1 1 38-1 141. In the former year he gave all Lancashire north of the 
Ribble to David King of Scots, as part of the price of peace, after the latter*s 
victorious campaign, undertaken in pursuit of his alleged title to Cumberland 
and Northumberland (see pp. 274 and 297). In the latter year as a result of 
his defeat and capture at the battle of Lincoln he gave the whole Honour of 
Lancaster — with the exception of the Montbegon fee — and Lancashire between 
the Ribble and the Mersey to Ranulf, Earl of Chester, under circumstances 
which are fully detailed in the following pages (see pp. 368 ^/ se^,). 

I must venture to point out, in the first place, that the cam- 
paign which ended in David's rout at ' the Battle of the Standard ' 

^ Feudal England, ^. 189. 


on Cowton Moor can hardly be described as ' victorious ' ; in 
the second, that the treaty with David took place, not in 1 138, 
but in April 1139 ; in the third, that this treaty mentions 
only the earldom of Northumberland, and says nothing of 
Lancashire ; in the fourth, that Mr. Farrer here contradicts 
himself, for the two interesting charters (pp. 274-5) to which 
he refers us as belonging to the period of David's dominion in 
Lancashire are both dated by him as ' circa 1 136-8,' that is, as 
belonging to the period previous to the treaty which put 
David, he holds, in possession of north Lancashire. The 
point is one of considerable interest, for David's acquisition 
of this region, established by Mr. Farrer's charters, appears to 
have been hitherto overlooked. An additional reason for not 
assigning that acquisition to the treaty of 1139 is that the 
earldom of Northumberland was demanded throughout, and 
obtained, not for David, but for Henry his son, who issued 
charters as its earl. 

Next, as to the grant to Ranulf, Earl of Chester, Mr. Farrer 
here again, I fear, contradicts himself. On referring to the 
page cited we find the grant in question dated December 1140 
(pp. 367-8), while the Battle of Lincoln, as Mr. Farrer knows 
(p. 369), did not take place till 1 141. Moreover, on page 4 we 
find the charter similarly assigned to ' early in December, 
1 140.' This, it will be seen, upsets the whole argument. 
Lastly, the language used in this grant to the earl requires 
to be exactly given on account of its important bearing on 
the status of the county and the Honour at the time. The 
words are : — 

(i) Et totam terram Rogeri Pictavis a Northampton' usque in Scotiam, 
excepta terra Rogeri de Monte Begonis in Lincolnshire {sic). Dedit eciam 
idem Rex eidem Comiti hereditarie (2) honorem de Lancastre cum perti- 
nentiis suis et (3) totam terram deinter Ribliam et Mersam, etc., etc. (p. 368). 

It appears to me that in the passage quoted above from 
the introduction, Mr. Farrer has rolled up three grants into 
two, although they are separate in the charter. What was 
here the ' honor de Lancastre,' the subject of the second clause ? 
Was it not that ' honor Lancastriae ' which David speaks of in 
both his charters, and which represents, Mr. Farrer holds, 
Lancashire north of the Ribble, the sphere of David's do- 
minion ? As he has himself clearly explained in his notes to the 
Pipe Roll of 1 1 82 (p. 47), the Northern Circuit arranged in 
1 179 comprised, with other counties, (i) the land 'Inter Rible 



et Mersesee/ and (2) 'Loncastre.' On this he observes that 
' the nomenclature and divisions of the Domesday Survey were 
still in use.' It appears to me that they were similarly in use 
at the intervening period when Stephen made the above grant 
to Earl Ranulf, and that, consequently, the district north of 
the Ribble was included in that grant. It is only ' after 1 1 82 * 
that the two portions into which was divided the Lancashire 
of to-day begin to be ' described as a shire,' and ' it may be 
said that in 1 1 8 2 the two ancient divisions, viz. " the land 
between the Ribble and the Mersey" and "Lancaster," were 
finally united in name under the style of " Lancashire " ' (p. 
xvii.), the river Lyme being adopted as the boundary of the 

If Mr. Farrer had done no more than continue the 
printing of the Pipe Rolls beyond 1 175, the limit of the Pipe 
Roll Society's publications, to the close of John's reign, he 
would have earned our gratitude, but his notes add greatly to 
their interest and value. Particularly useful, it seems to me, 
is the list of outlying manors in other counties farmed with 
the Honour of Lancaster under Henry 11. While treating 
of this portion one may question whether the status of the 
thegns was ' distinctly servile in character.' Certain customary 
services were due from their lands, but these were not tech- 
nically of a ' servile ' character. The ' Radchenistri ' on the 
Welsh border were liable to similar work. 

It is when we turn to the collection of charters that the 
value of the evidence here printed for local family history 
becomes most apparent. The pedigree, for instance, of the 
Hoghtons of Hoghton is here carried back through Adam de 
Hocton to his grandfather ' Hamo Pincerna', who received a 
moiety of Heaton in Lonsdale in frank marriage with the 
daughter of Warine Bussel, who lived in the early years of 
the twelfth century. Indeed a single charter gives us three 
generations of the Hoghtons in that century. Here we have 
an excellent instance of what The Ancestor hopes to achieve 
namely, not mere destruction but the substitution of truth 
for error. I had to show in a paper on ' The Companions of 
the Conqueror,'^ that the account of the origin of this family 
which found its way into Burkes Peerage in 1900 was not 
only wildly wrong, but could actually be shown to relate to 

^ Monthly Review, June, 1901, p. 109. 


a family of another name, not in Lancashire, but in Norfolk. 
Now Mr. Farrer's work enables us to give the true origin 
and to show how ancient it is. 

Exactly similar is the case of Molyneux. In the article of 
which I have spoken I dealt with the Battle ' roll/ and cited 
from Burke s Peerage this amazing passage : — 

William de Molines, one of the Norman nobles in the train of the 
Conqueror, stands in the eighteenth order upon the roll of Battle Abbey.^ 

The surname of ' Molines' is wanting as a fact, according to 
the late Duchess of Cleveland, in all the copies of the roll ; 
and even if it had been there, it would have been worthless as 
evidence. Nor, as Mr. Farrer points out, is the name of 
' Molyneux ' the same. The latter is derived not from Moulins, 
but from Moulineaux. But if we cannot take the house 
back to the battle of Hastings, Mr. Farrer holds that we 
can trace its pedigree, and even its possession of that Sefton 
from which the title of its earldom is derived, to the days of 
William Rufus, when its founder received from Roger of 
Poitou the moiety of a knight's fee. 

The earliest charter, it appears, in which the name is 
found is that of Stephen, here printed, by which he grants to 
Robert de ' Moliness ' and 'his heir ' his land in Down Lither- 
land for fourteen shillings a year. Mr. Farrer dates this 
charter ^ circa 1114-1116,' but this date involves a double 
fallacy. It is based on the assumptions that Stephen, who 
makes this grant as Count of Boulogne and Mortain, obtained 
the Honour of Lancaster in 1 1 14, and that he already possessed 
those styles at that date. I have shown above that these 
are errors ; and as Stephen seems to be first styled Count of 
Boulogne in 1 125, 1 think that this charter cannot be of earlier 
date. Mr. Farrer rightly hesitates to accept a 'Vivian de 
Mulinaus ' as the first feoffee of Sefton {temp, William Rufus), 
pointing out that the incorrect pedigree drawn up by William 
Dethick, Garter, 20 July, 1589, makes him father of an Adam 
who released land to Cockersand Abbey, that abbey not being 
founded till about 11 84. But in any case it is clear that 
Molyneux of Sefton is among the oldest of our Norman 

On a famous Lancashire name, that of the Lathoms of 

^ Monthly Review, June, 1901, p. 96. This passage is duly repeated in 
the 1902 edition of * Burke.' 



Lathom, Mr. Farrer has something to say. He finds their 
founder, Robert son of Henry, occurring on the Pipe Roll ot 
1 1 69. The Singleton family can be traced, it seems, a little 
further back; for a charter of circa 1155, here printed, 
confirms to their ancestor Uchtred son of Huck eight 
bovates in Broughton in Amounderness for eight shillings 
a year. One of the witnesses of this charter is Roger son of 
Ravenkil, to whom Mr. Farrer is 'inclined to attribute a 
Scandinavian origin, as the descendant of one of the Norse 
invaders who descended upon the coast of Lancashire in the 
tenth century.' He is here identified as son of a Raghanald, 
thegn of Lytham, Bootle and Woodplumpton, and as 
father of the Richard who founded Lytham Priory and lived 
under Henry II. and Richard 1. Another ancient local family 
now represented in the peerage is that of Pennington, ot 
which the founder Gamel, living about the middle of the 
twelfth century, bore one of the interesting names found 
in this district among thegns of native origin. 

When we turn to a well-known baronial house of alien 
extraction, Mr. Farrer's work appears to me not quite so 
satisfactory. He cannot tell us whether the Montbegons* 
fief of Hornby was 'created by Roger the Poictevin, by 
Henry I. or by Count Stephen after he received the Honour 
of Lancaster ' ; nor, as I understand, does he carry back that 
family beyond the Lindsey survey, in which it is found 
about the middle of the reign of Henry I. holding lands 
in Lincolnshire. Yet Roger de Montbegon and his wife 
were already holding lands 'between Ribble and Mersey' 
under William Rufus, and although no one, it would seem,, 
has observed the fact, Robert de Montbegon occurs in 
Domesday Book. Again, we read, on page 146, of Roger 
de Montbegon giving the enormous sum of ;£500 (should it 
not be 500 marcs T) in 1 199, for ' Olive, the widow of Robert 
de St. John, with her estate in co. York,' but there is 
no mention of the fact that she was an heiress in her own 
right and of exceptionally interesting origin.^ 

In glancing through these pages one cannot help observing 
a certain number of such slips as are apt to creep into a work 
dealing with so many facts, names and dates. The important 
charter of Richard I. to Gilbert Fitz Reinfred was renewed, 

^ See my Studies in Peerage and Family History ^ pp. vii. 127. 



according to Mr. Farrer, ' at Chalus, on March 5th in the 
loth year, 1199, exactly one month before his death from 
a wound sustained in the siege of that town * (p. 398). This, 
if accurate, would overthrow the statements of all the chroni- 
clers. But ' Castrum Liddi ' was not Chalus ; it was Chateau- 
du-Loir, between Tours and Le Mans, far away to the north, 
and this charter is of extreme importance as evidence of 
Richard's whereabouts at the date of its grant. Three pages 
further on (p. 401), another renewal of a charter under 
Richard's second seal is attributed (rightly, I think) by Mr. 
Farrer to the same occasion, but wrongly to Chalus. And 
the old belief as to the second seal coming into use in 1 1 94 
is there repeated on Dr. Stubbs' authority, although I have 
admittedly disproved it in my Feudal England. The assertion 
that ' Henry Duke of Normandy, son of the Empress Matilda, 
had been elected Sovereign at Winchester on April 8 th, 1 141 ' 
(p. 4), is, I must confess, startling. 

Among minor points one may note that Faramus was not 
a ' Norman ' baron (p. 308), that on page 302 ' Campuauene ' is 
not represented by Campagny, while ' Oisiuelini ' should be 
read ' Oismelini.' On page 315 John is made to speak of 
Henry I. as ' his grandfather,' though the charter has ' proavi,' 
and on the next page Haughley, the head of a great Honour, is 
wrongly placed in Essex instead of in Suffolk. Farnham Royal 
is in Bucks, not in Leicestershire (p. 297), and a difficulty 
about the abbots of Evesham, in Norman times, on page 321, 
has been duly dealt with by General Wrottesley and in the 
Introduction to Domesday in the Victoria History of Worcester- 
shire, ' Graham,' one may add, is Grantham, not Greetham, 
Lines (p. 369). 

These however are but small points. What is really 
serious is the error as to the charter constituting the Preston 
guild merchant, of which the local festivities have reminded 
us this very year. By combining an entry on the Pipe Roll 
of 1 175 (p. 43) with the charter of Henry IL on pages 412-3, 
it becomes clear, as Mr. Farrer says, that this charter granting 
to Preston the liberties enjoyed by Newcastle-under-Lyme 
belongs to the autumn of that year. But, unluckily, he goes 
further and prints after it, as exemplifying those liberties, the 
* charter of Henry IL to the burgesses of Newcastle-under- 
Lyme, creating that town a free borough with a guild 
merchant and all the liberties and free customs pertaining 


to such a guild/ September 18, 1173, 19 Henry II. The 
opening and the closing words of this charter prove at once 
that it was granted, not by Henry II., but by Henry III., to 
whose nineteenth year (1235) it belongs. I will not attempt 
to explain the whole mystery, but Mr. Farrer, I am sure, 
will be the first to admit the gravity of the error, for he 
modestly anticipates in his introduction even more defects 
in his work than the critic will be able to discover. 

One may congratulate, in conclusion, not only students, 
but Mr. Farrer on the publication of these documents within 
the covers of a single volume. The number of periodicals 
and transactions in which such subjects are dealt with seems 
to be ever on the increase, and the difficulty of finding what 
one is in search of increases in proportion. Here, on the 
contrary, it is possible to consult with luxurious ease one's 
materials. Mr. Farrer, on his part, must be envied for having 
permanently associated his name with the early history of 
Lancashire by producing this handsome volume, while other 
workers have to scatter their efforts up and down among 
those publications which are willing to give them refuge. 



Oriel now comes into line with those few colleges of the 
Universities of Oxford and Cambridge whose records are 
made accessible to the biographer and historian. It is 
questionable whether any single work is of more constant 
service in dealing with English genealogy of the post-medieval 
period than the eight volumes of Mr. Joseph Foster's Alumni 
Oxonienses, although in accuracy of detail they leave much to 
be desired. But for ample and exact particulars of the careers 
of Oriel men one must in future look to Dr. ShadwelFs two 
volumes of records. 

In the compilation of these Oriel dossiers five college books 
have been called to aid : the College Register, the Treasurers' 

1 Registrum Orielensej an account of the members of Oriel College, Oxford. 
Vol. i., 1 5 00- 1 700 ; vol. ii., 1 701-1900. Collected and arranged by Charles 
Lancelot Shadwell, D.C.L., late Fellow of Oriel College. (London : Henry 



Accounts, the Caution Books, the Buttery Books, and the 
Benefactors' Books. From these sources we have the 
academical history of the student : his admission to Oriel 
College and his matriculation, his payments of caution money 
and his library fees, his degrees, and his gifts of plate — * eare 
goblets,' bowls and covers, salt-cellars and tankards — much of 
which King Charles' cruel necessities melted into shillings. 
Even had it survived the civil war the Oriel plate would not 
have been with us to glad our sale-rooms, for old and battered 
or worn plate was doomed without remorse to the melting- 
pot by Fellows for whom ancient silver pieces had none of 
that charm which to-day raises the price of a pint pot to its 
fill of guineas. A tankard may have borne name and arms of 
a dead and gone commoner with inscriptions in good Oriel 
Latin, but when rubbed or dinted it was carried away by the 
silversmith in exchange for a new salver or sugar-caster. The 
ecclesiologist will note with interest that Nathaniel Napier, a 
fellow-commoner of 1653-4, gave a bronze eagle for the chapel 
in place of the customary silver piece. 

We are assured by Dr. Shadwell that every particular 
concerning the students has been inserted, for which the college 
books are the authority. But Dr. Shadwell's work has not 
ended here. Whenever easily obtainable, additional notes have 
been added of the student's career in the world or church 
preferment. In some few cases wills are quoted ; in others 
the dates of birth or baptism, death or burial have been filled in. 
Some students indeed appear in the pages of this register 
entirely by grace of researches made outside the college records, 
and we are reminded of this by the fact that Alexander Barclay, 
the author of the Ship of Fools, heads Dr. Shadwell's register 
although the books of his reputed college know him not. 

The genealogist will recognise at once the two sources 
from which the college drew its students — the commoners and 
fellow-commoners who matriculate as sons of squires, knights, 
and lords, and the servitors or battelers who come upon the 
books as JiL pleh. or fiL paup. That an Oxford undergraduate 
should valet another, live upon his broken meats and sleep 
at his bed-foot is strange reading in the twentieth century, but 
it should be remembered that many a batteler was a tenant's 
son who had ridden to college with his young master, and that 
the industrious servitor might come in the end to sit at the 
high table with a silver tankard in his fist. With the eighteenth 



century these poor scholars disappear, but two Bible clerks 
- remain, whose names and light duties recall, although to the 
antiquary only, a class whose position latter-day sentiment 
would not bear with. The magnificent fellow-commoner 
survived the poor scholar to disappear in his turn before the 
modern spirit. 

Not the least interesting entries are those of students who 
matriculate as cler, fil.^ of whom the first would appear to 
be William Cooke of Northamptonshire in 1586, an ex- 
hibitioner of St. Anthony's Hospital. The admissions of 
the sons of the clergy as commoners will add much new 
material for the long wrangle over Macaulay's famous estimate 
of the social position of the English clergy in the seventeenth 

Apart from its value to the genealogist and biographer, 
our knowledge of old academic life is the richer for such a 
work as this. It is good news of the awakening interest in 
historical research that the impressions of Dr. ShadwelFs first 
volume should be already all but exhausted. The ' dignity of 
the Society,' a phrase with which a famous will made us lately 
familiar, is enhanced by these two volumes which will occupy 
an honoured place among the Oriel bookshelves. At the 
thought we turn to the entry in 1873 of ' Rhodes, Cecil John 
— matr. Oriel, 13 Oct. 1873, 4*"^ Francisci Will, de Bishops 
Stortford, Herts, cler., 20,' and contrast the record of the 
famous premier of Cape Colony with that of his fellow admitted 
upon the same day, of whose career since taking a bachelor's 
degree Dr. Shadwell has but to say that he is ' believed to be 
no longer living.' 


The St. George's Kalendar, whose first number was issued 
as long ago as the first year of this present century, has now 
to welcome two other armorial kalendars, newcomers in these 
islands. For many years the admirably produced and most 
interesting work of Otto Hupp of Munich has come oversea 
to an increasing number of Englishmen who find his yearly 

^ T^he Scottish Heraldic Kalendar for the year 1903 ; Herbert H. Flower 
(editor) ; L. Ingleby Wood (artist) ; Otto Schulze, Edinburgh. The 
Imperial Heraldic Kalendar, 1903 ; Otto Schulze, Edinburgh. 



revival of the art of the old German shield rolls beautiful and 
suggestive, and it is not strange that, once the experiment 
was ventured upon, more than one attempt should be made to 
nationalize with us the idea which he originated. 

The first of these kalendars is entitled The Scottish Heraldic 
Kalendar, It was not to be imagined that the Scot, in London 
or in Edinburgh, would waste two saxpences upon a kalendar 
such as the George' Sy which finds in the English homefield 
enough armory for its purpose. The Scottish Heraldic Kalendaj 
then has its welcome assured from Edinburgh to New 
Zealand, to say nothing of that city of London in which the 
prophecy of the stone of Scone is often ruefully remembered 
by the race which carried that fatal fetish southward. 

Six plates only are afforded by this first issue of The 
Scottish Kalendary a number which should be increased by the 
popularity which such a venture should earn. The plates of 
arms are of the armorial ensigns of the Prince of Wales as 
Prince and Great Steward of Scotland, of Robert Bruce, and of 
four of his supporters : Sir Walter the Steward, the good Sir 
James of Douglas, Sir Christopher Seton, and Randolph, Earl 
of Moray. The arms are boldly drawn in colours, the helmets 
and mantles taking inspiration somewhat directly from the 
Munchener kalendar, a fact which sometimes throws the 
crests and shields somewhat out of the picture. 

An accompanying kalendar affords the names and feasts 
of ancient Scottish saints, to which have been added those 
commemorated in Archbishop Laud's Scottish Prayer-book, 
with dates of great events of Scottish history. A too rapid 
glance at these would suggest that the occasions of Scottish 
rejoicing are afforded in the main by such anniversaries as the 
murder of Lord Darnley, the assassination of the Regent 
Moray, the assassination of King James L and the beheading 
or bloody deaths of many others who have figured upon the 
perilous stage of Scottish history. These reminiscences of 
the scaffold should have warned our editor against such 
dangerous items in his kalendars as the commemorations of 
the deaths of certain Kings of Scotland, James VIIL 
Charles IIL and Henry IX., and if fear of the axe could not 
stay his hand, good Scottish logic might have served. For if 
Henry IX. has lived and reigned who then is King Edward 
VII. whose 'ascension* is recorded under January 22. Surely 
if the Act of Settlement prevail upon January 22, it must 



be respected even upon January 31, and the gentleman who 
died upon the latter date must be content with a humbler 

With the description of the arms of the ' Duke of 
Rothesay ' we begin to differ with our editor in the matter of 
blazonry, l^he Ancestor has from the first protested against 
the tangle of words in mishandled French tripping over 
unnecessary commas which the post-medieval heraldry books 
have inveigled too many antiquaries into adopting. But 
when the heraldry book system is adopted its intricacies should 
be followed with due care. There is no reason or ancient 
precedent whatever for describing the lion of the Scottish royal 
crest as aught but a sitting lion, crowned and holding a sword 
and sceptre in his paws, but if the later form of blazon be 
followed some more possible jargon might be found for the 
beast's position than serjant effronte, Lozendy is, we presume, 
a misprint in the case of the Teck escutcheon, but we would 
point out that the lions passant of the blazon are lions passant 
gardant or ' leopards ' in the picture. We cannot complain 
that the dragon badge of the Prince of Wales has its decorative 
value destroyed by the addition of a piece of ground cut off 
for it to prowl upon, for this tasteless folly has been ordered by 
the officials who have set forth the prince's achievement, but 
we may suggest that the dragon has no need of a label about 
his neck, for the prince is the lord and not the heir apparent 
in his principality of Wales. At the early date of the arms 
chosen for illustration the finding of crests has been a difficulty 
for the artist. The helm of Robert Bruce has been surmounted 
by the most improbable crest for the period of a large turban- 
like red cap within a crown with a lion sitting upon the top, 
crowned in like fashion and bearing a sword. The whole of 
this composition is too briefly described in the letterpress as a 
lion serjant gules^ and for authority we are referred to the crest 
of David II. in the Armorial de Geire^ as the printer miscalls the 
book of the Gelre herald. The crest, too, violates the laws of 
good heraldry by sitting sidelong upon a helm which fronts us. 
The artist should understand that he may not serve two 
masters. If the customs of the debased heraldic system of 
our times are to be followed thus, it is useless to attempt to 
give the ancient manner to his picture of arms. Over the helm 
of Sir Walter the Steward we have a vast lion head rased, for 
which we imagine no authority could be produced. The 



blazon of the shield is again undecided. A checkered or 
cheeky fesse may be described by the book, if the blazoner 
prefers it, as a fesse cheque ; but when we have announced 
that cheque is a French word, and therefore accented it, it 
should bear the acute and not the grave accent which follows it 

The achievement of Douglas strikes us as the most 
successful in the kalendar. The wreath from which the crest 
springs might in this as in other cases make more clear that it is 
a true twist round the brows of the helmet and not a straight 
and sausage-shaped object, but the whole of this composition 
is well balanced, and the red heart of Douglas is kept to the 
reasonable size which we find upon the ancient seals of the 
house. Sir Christopher Seton's crest of the ermine goat's head 
might well have been adjusted upon the helm after the fashion 
which it takes in Gelre's armorial, which, by the way, gives the 
crest of Randolph of Moray as a buck's head, and not as the 
antelope's head here figured. 

The whole kalendar is an essay to which we wish the 
prosperity it will doubtless attain to in a land which holds 
more closely to the sweet and bitter memories of the past than, 
as we admit with regret, does the great kingdom to the south. 
Therefore we cannot quarrel with the perfervid preface in 
which the editor declares that no finer ' stores of National 
Heraldry and History exist in any country of Europe,' 
although the former part of the boast would be hard to 
sustain — for Scotland, apart from some interesting seals, is very 
poor in fine old examples of arms. But even the perfervid 
humour cannot excuse the statement that our present 
sovereign ' rests his title to the imperial throne on his descent 
from the Stuart race.' However the matter may be recorded 
in the rich stores of Scottish history, we read otherwise in 
our southern history books. 

For the Imperial Heraldic Kalendar we have little to say. 
The cover bears a shield of the royal arms indifferently 
executed in a style which contrasts forcibly with the Garter 
around it. This Garter, which has been copied from the one 
surrounding the arms of Charles the Bold on his Garter plate 
at Windsor, follows that example with too little knowledge. 
The lower part of this famous plate having been broken away 
in the original, our artist here has felt himself unequal to 
inventing a buckle and tongue, and therefore leaves his Garter 


as meaningless as the edge of a soup plate with a Garter motto 
upon it. 

In the six plates of arms nothing calls for our attention but 
the crest of the Duke of Devonshire, in which a hissing cobra 
rears its long neck in a manner which makes a more possible 
and effective crest than the ' nowed ' snake which modern 
debased heraldry insists upon depicting as trundling its feeble 
coils after a fashion which never fails to suggest the safety 
bicycle. We have here Lord Salisbury's arms, with nothing 
done to temper the difficulties of the improbable crest with 
its morion floating in the air above a sheaf of arrows. Lord 
Rosebery's arms and Sir William Vernon-Harcourt's. The 
hopeless muddle of the blazon of Sir William's quartered coat 
shows that the editor of the kalendar is unacquainted with any 
known system of heraldry, and the vast peacock, perched 
in haphazard fashion sideways upon the fronted helm, shows 
an equal ignorance in the artist of armorial composition. The 
helms of the peers follow in each case the ridiculous custom of 
sitting themselves upon the red caps ot the coronets. The 
archiepiscopal cross in the arms of the Archbishop ot 
Canterbury is described as a ' crosier or episcopal staff,' a 
blunder which shows slight acquaintance with the church and 
the ornaments of the ministers thereof. The last achievement 
of arms is that of Michael Arthur Bass, Lord Burton, and 
many innocent folk will learn for the first time that Lord Bass 
has abandoned the ancient badge of the equilateral triangle 
gules for a newer and more complicated arrangement of demi- 
lions and fleurs de lys. The imperial reasons for the 
appearance of his arms in the Imperial Heraldic Kalendar are 
beyond our guessing. His supporters are described as lions 
regardant^ and as the heraldry of the handbooks is followed in 
the blazon, this should mean that their heads are craned 
backward ; but this illustration does not show this, and the lions' 
feet in the picture rest upon harts' heads rased, which are 
^ caboshed' in the blazon. But the blazon with its mis-spellings 
and wandering punctuation is even less important than the 
pictures, which at least are printed in bright colours which take 
the eye. The back of the cover is adorned with shields of arms 
of the colonies and these shields are styled ' crests ' by the 



For Mr. Chadband's ' soaring human boy ' the austerities 
of the study of English history are mitigated by one circum- 
stance only. The characters in the heavily constructed 
romances of Mr. Hume and Dr. Bright are not always 
devising Constitutions of Clarendon or Provisions of Oxford 
with the sole intent, as it appears to the embittered schoolboy, 
of adding more dates to the hopeless cairn of dates which 
must be picked over and committed to memory or to 
memory's secret servant, the shirt-cuff. There comes a 
tide in the affairs of kings when, delay the matter as the 
crabbed historian will, they must put on shining plates of 
steel and go gallantly with their knights at their backs to meet 
other kings over sea and rush into hewing and thrusting against 
other eager horsemen. The historians would hurry over these 
matters protesting, if of the old school, that the rise of the 
Whig party to power marks the spot where the Historic Muse 
should linger dallying, and, if of the new school, that the rise 
under the Tudors of the price of the three-hooped pot of ale is 
the toothsome kernel of all chronicles. But the schoolboy 
heeds them not, and reconstructing the battle of Cressy upon 
his desk with the aid of his collection of steel nibs passes with 
agreeable musings the hour which should have crammed him 
with indigestible facts. 

The prize boy, who moves up the school term by term, 
to whom the Constitutions of Clarendon are familiar and whom 
the appearance of the Provisions of Oxford in an examination 
paper moves to no desperate guess at the peculiarities of some 
forgotten siege larder, may in time stand up a historian, 
although, sooth to say, few of his kind come to this end, but 
the boy who decorates his history book's fly-leaf with the 
doings of swords and battle-axes, is, although he would deny 
the suggestion in his wrath, an antiquary in making. 

For the past time of the nation clangs like a smithy, and 
the antiquary who loves the past must learn to love and to 
know something of the white weapon which hung at the thigh 
of most of our forefathers whose heads had escaped the 
Church's razor, and even, if bishops' registers speak truth, by 

^ T^he Smrd and the Centuriejy by Captain Alfred Hutton, F.S.A. (London : 
Grant Richards). 



the side of some turbulent men who should have learned the 
doom appointed for those who smite with the sword. The 
story of the arms beloved by those who came before us will 
not appeal to the antiquary alone, for the Englishman who 
sees an old sword hung upon a wall without a passing desire 
to take it in his hands is a poor soul, for whom the men of 
Cressy and Agincourt have died in vain. 

In Captain Hutton's The Sword ana the Centuries we have 
a big book with a peculiar value. It may be said of Captain 
Hutton that he is become an antiquary for love of the sword 
and its ancestry. With due respect for the letters which follow 
his name his book is a book of the archaeology of the sword 
written by a swordsman, rather than a book of old swordsman- 
ship written by an antiquary, and here lies its essential interest. 
Others will follow him who will explain to us in more learned 
detail the development of the art and craft of sword smithing 
and history of ornament as applied to the weapon, and the 
signs whereby we may set dates to the few specimens which 
time may cast up. But in Captain Hutton we have a master 
of fence, a stark man of his hands, whose fingers well know 
the poise and balance of all weapons, whose wits have set them- 
selves to learn how best may be delivered the crashing stroke 
of the battle-axe, the whirling * hauke ' of the two-hand sword, 
and the subtle thrust of the colichemarde. 

When such a man sets himself to fight over again for us 
some scores of the famous combats of history, from fifteenth- 
century axe work to nineteenth-century backswording, no 
antiquary or historian can afford to lose a seat in his class. 
Although Captain Hutton's stories are for the well-read man 
old stories retold, they are retold with a purpose and spirit 
which compels interest. 

As in other collections of this nature the earlier period is 
but slightly represented. Olivier de la Marchess account of 
the fight on foot and on horseback of the Lord of Ternant 
with a Spanish squire, and the story of Jacques de Lalain^s 
battle-axe combat with one Thomas Que of England, who 
was doubtless a Kay from the north country, these two, with 
the savage medley of two tailors of Valenciennes, carry us to 
the end of the middle ages. Indeed, we might have spared 
Mahuot and Jacotin from a book carrying so knightly a title. 
Mahuot, who prefaces his club attack with a dash of sand in 
his adversary's eyes, and Jacotin, who tears Mahuot's own two 



eyes from their sockets before flinging him over the barricade 
to the waiting hangman, were, as Alice said of the Walrus and 
his friend, ' both very unpleasant characters,' and the gallows 
pitched outside the lists might in such cases have been licensed 
to carry two. Captain Hutton's note on such combats of the 
baser sort becomes strangely inexact when he quotes the draw- 
ing in the margin of a fourteenth-century plea roll of the 
judicial duel between Hamon le Stare and Walter Blowberne, 
which drawing he can never have examined with any care. 
It is quoted to support the assertion of Vulson de la Colom- 
biere that in England and France common men in these cases 

* were armed with the club only, as the shield, being that part 
of the armour on which its owner's heraldic devices were 
painted, was considered doubly noble, and it must in no way 
be contaminated with the touch of plebeian hands.' Of the 
drawing in question our author says that the combatants are 

* armed with a peculiar kind of club, and are ^ without shields.' 
As Hamon, who is depicted in the background of the drawing 
as suffering the fate of his namesake, the son of Hamme- 
datha, and Walter his vanquisher, both appear with large 
shields and armed with beaked axes or martels, it would 
be better that Captain Hutton should see such matters with 
his own sharp eyes rather than with those of the good M. 

With the coming of the sixteenth century Captain Hutton 
is more at ease. The swords and daggers, rapiers and rapier- 
foils which so admirably illustrate his margins are for the most 
part familiar blades from his own armoury, and blades used 
after fashions of which he is perhaps the best known of living 
exponents. We have the glorious combat in which Bayard 
overthrew a Spaniard whose treachery would have satisfied an 
Elizabethan playhouse, and the combat which the Baron of 
Vienne le Chastel waged in his lady's quarrel. The famous duel 
of Jarnac and Chastaigneraie, so interesting in its detail to the 
swordsman, is of course given us at length, and another 
attempt is made to clear the coup de Jarnac from the infamy 
which a misapplied proverb would fix to it. Many stories are 
added of those days of King Francis, and Brantome is picked 
over again for his tales of noble cutthroats and assassins, in which 
he is able for the most part to show how the scripture was 
fulfilled upon the bodies of those who smote with the rapier, 
the estoc and the dagger. Indeed, the reader may remark 



with high satisfaction that, in the days of King Louis 
XII 1. and of the Grand Monarque, the headsman was 
sometimes permitted to improve upon the promise of the 
gospel. The famous duel of the Mignons is here well told, 
and we may again rejoice over the tale of how, at a single 
joyous meeting in a horse market, no less than four of the 
gentlemen who perfumed the court of Henry III. with their 
presence were sent to precede their royal master in the path 
down which the dagger of a deserving but as yet unbeatified 
ecclesiastic was soon to hurry him. 

The era of the colichemarde and small sword follows that 
of the rapier and dagger. Captain Hutton might with advantage 
have given the general reader the curious etymology of the 
former word. We have the adventure of the Regent Orleans 
and of the Chevalier d'Eon de Beaumont, with many other such 
stories. The Duke of Hamilton is killed by a mysterious sword- 
thrust after having rid the world of my Lord Mohun. Major 
Oneby runs Mr. Gower through and through behind a locked 
door in a tavern room, and in the seclusion of his Newgate cell 
saves the hangman his black job. In another tavern room my 
Lord Byron slays his neighbour, Mr. Chaworth. We are 
reminded that little more than a century ago privilege of 
peerage could save a peer from the ungentlemanly penalties of 
manslaughter. With the period of Sheridan^s two duels with 
Captain Matthews, the day of the sword is ending in England. 
The pistol supplanted the sword, and the deadliness of the 
pistol in the hands of Captain Gronow and his friends and its 
absurdity in the shaking fingers of Mr. Winkle and his friends 
put an end for ever to the duel in England, a matter for a 
dozen congratulations on the part of all sensible people, and 
for a half-hearted regret on the part of a few who have found 
that the policeman and the magistrate cannot on all occasions 
protect a private man's honour. 

Captain Hutton's chapters on schools of fence are carried as 
late as M. Pierre Vigny's essays in the escrime of the walking 
stick, but in the space which he leaves himself his account of 
the school of St. George and the Angelos is of necessity slight 
and anecdotal. 

A somewhat inconsequent account of the headsman Sanson 
might have been allowed to make way for more useful matter. 
So also the legends of the prowess of Rob Roy, which add 
nothing to our knowledge of the claymore and dirk. Even 



good Sir Walter, as his famous notes to Rob Roy will show, 
had more than suspicion of the heroic doings of this braggart 
Highland cattle thief. We would willingly have seen such 
pages filled with more tales of the doings of George Silver of 
the ' grips and closes,' of Toby Silver his worthy brother, and 
of that Austin Badger who made so many tall frays with those 
most English weapons, the broadsword and round target — 

All in the open manly way 
Of honest gentlemen, 

for, truth to tell, Captain Hutton's stories of oversea rapier and 
dagger men leave an ill taste in the mouth, and it is not good 
that the white weapon should be tarnished by scandals. 

Were another name than Captain Hutton's set to The Swora 
and the Centuries we should be querulous at such chapter open- 
ings as 

* Our former gallant scene is played, and the curtain down. Ring up 
again, Mr. Prompter, and now what meets our eye ? ' 

and we might express a distaste for such colloquialisms as meet 
us in the account of Major Oneby's duel. 'Young and old 
they all wore wigs in those days. Wasn't it a funny fashion } ' 
But seeing that it is Captain Hutton with whom we have to 
deal. Captain Hutton, who could meet us like George Silver, 
his spiritual ancestor, with Single Rapier, Rapier and Dagger, 
the Single Dagger, the Sword and Target, the Sword and 
Buckler, and two-hand Sword, the Staffe, Battell Axe or 
Morris Pike, we will be discreet and content ourselves for an 
ending with hearty commendation of this great Swordsman's 
book of Swordsmanship. 

O. B. 


The latest addition to the list of county record societies is 
that of Sussex, a county already distinguished for the excel- 
lence of the volumes issued by its Archaeological Society. 
The honorary secretary of the latter, Mr. MicheU Whitley, 
occupies the same position in the newly-formed society, and is 
to be congratulated on obtaining the support of a very fair 
number of members at the outset. 

^ Sussex Marriage Licenses (Lewes : Sussex Record Society, 1902). 



For the readers of 'The Ancestor it is needless to dwell on 
the value or interest of marriage licenses. These which are 
here printed are of the Archdeaconry of Lewes, and cover 
' the whole of East Sussex with the exception of eleven 
parishes in the Deanery of South Mailing, all of which were 
peculiars of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and of the parish 
of Battle, a peculiar of the Dean of Battle/ Mr. Dunkin, a 
member of the society's council, who has edited the volume, 
has executed his task with great care, and the indexes of 
persons and of places deserve special commendation. The 
places are indexed on the sound system adopted by the Public 
Record Office, namely that of giving first the modern name, 
followed by its variants within parentheses. The proportion 
of ' yeomen * in these entries appears to be very large. Here 
and there are scattered a few Christian names which would 
have delighted the author of Hudihras, One notes ' Zealous 
Fuller ' as a surety of ' Obedient Fuller ' (1607), and ^ More- 
fruit LufFe * of Heathfield, brother of 'Preserve LufFe' (1626), 
a combination which suggests the existence of a Realjam Luffe 
completing the trio. Among the brides are ' Fearegod ' and 
' Rejoyce ' Harman, maidens, and ' Ephanuell ' Dyne, widow. 
The prize, however, should perhaps be awarded to ' Performe- 
thyvowes Seires ' (1632), a Maresfield carrier. Such record 
societies as that which has issued this volume ought to appeal 
to those whose ancestors were long settled in a county as being 
almost certain to supply them with useful genealogical in- 

J. H. R. 


In 1734 began the first work which could serve as an 
annual directory of the Peerage. Of the first impression one 
copy remains, which was found in the British Museum bound 
up with a Goldsmith's almanac for 1735. This tiny little 
book is now republished in fac-simile with an introduction by 
Mr. A. C. Fox-Davies. To the 'exact list of the Lords 
Spiritual and Temporal ' is added the ' exact list of the House 
of Commons,' which is perhaps more interesting than the list 
of the Lords, 

^ An Exact List of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal (Elliot Stock, 1902). 



Mr. Fox-Davies's figures show us the present numbers 
of our crowded upper house for comparison with those of 
1734, when lords were few in the land, although no less than 
thirty-one dukes sat in that house of 1734. Beyond the 
scantiness of the list these lords of King George II/s house 
offer few points for comment. Their London addresses show 
us the movement of fashion. No duke lives now in Soho 
Square as did the Duke of Cleveland, nor do the neighbour- 
ing mazes of Soho shelter to-day the group of earls who 
threaded their way home to them from Westminster with link- 
boys before and running footmen beside. Mr. Fox-Davies's 
editorial remarks in the matter of these dwellings show no great 
familiarity with London topography. Dirty Lane, where lived 
the Earl of Abingdon, was a tolerably important West End 
street, despite its humble name ; but Mr. Fox-Davies interjects, 
'wherever that neighbourhood may have been,' and his comment 
on Lord Orrery's address of ' Petty France ' leaves us doubt- 
ing whether he realizes that ' Petty France ' was in London. 
The residence of Earl Rivers at Liege needs, we are told, - no 
further explanation,' but to those who do not remember that 
the then Lord Rivers was a canon at Liege an explanation 
might be needed. Lord Denbigh's name is, it is true, here 
spelled as Fielding, but to say that ' this would seem to 
discount the celebrated anecdote' of Henry Fielding's jest 
founded upon the spelling of Feilding is surely attaching too 
much value to the authority of this little book. The Feildings 
have for centuries favoured the present spelling of their name, 
and Mr. Fox-Davies would hardly have us believe, also on the 
word of the Complete List, that Lord Haversham spelled his 
name Thopmson. 

The commoners, as we have said, give a more interesting 
view to one glancing down their list. Here in this very un- 
reformxcd Parliament of 1734 are the old county families sitting 
for the old boroughs. The carpet-bagger as we know him was 
not. When in 1734 a stranger came to a strange borough, 
he camiC with a bag of guineas for the electors to drink his 
health with, and safely disposed in his saddle bags he carried 
my lord's conge d elire to the free and independent electors. 
But opposite this list of names a genealogist might set the 
names of the counties which sent these members up, and be 
right in most cases. Here be three Walpoles from Norfolk, 
with Sir Robert at the head of them, and three Onslows from 



Surrey. Devonshire sends Courtenay, Arscot, Chichester, 
Fortescue and RoUe ; Shropshire three Kynastons and a 
Corbet ; Staffordshire a Bagot and a Chetwynd ; whilst five 
Finches and four Lowthers sit in this parliament. 

Bound in its trim cover of linen boards, counterfeiting old 
leather with some success, this little book will tempt many who 
keep a modern Burke or Debrett upon their reference shelves 
to set beside it this little ancestor of theirs. 


By the generosity of Mr. John Henry Metcalfe The 
Ancestor has received one of the six presentation copies of 
his book on the Scrope earldom of Wiltes. This sumptuous 
work hardly takes its place as a work of genealogy, although 
a great chart pedigree of the Scropes of Danby has been added 
to it. It is rather to be regarded as a memorial and a plea — a 
memorial of the noble Yorkshire house of Scrope and a plea 
for the recognition of the present head of the name as Earl of 
Wiltes according to the terms of the creation of that earldom. 

The name of Scrope, so famous in our history, is one of 
those strange epithet names which the Normans flung at one 
another in their gibing speech. Giffard the chubby-cheek and 
Pauncefote the paunch-face may be set beside Scrope the 
crab, a name which, aimed at a pair of grasping ancestral hands 
or the sidelong walk of a bow-legged forefather, has in the 
course of splendid generations come to have a noble ring in 
it. The name is found soon after the conquest of England, 
but the pedigree of the right line of Scrope may begin safely 
with Sir William le Scrope of Bolton, the bailiff of Rich- 
mondshire, who fought at Falkirk field. The son of this 
William came to be Chief Justice of England, so that Scrope 
had for a firm foundation, even as the most of the old names 
in the peerage, the fee-book of a successful lawyer. From 
the loins of the chief justice came a race of warriors. His 
eldest son died of wounds taken at the siege of Morlaix ; the 
youngest was at Nevill's Cross, Calais and Najara, and was 
summoned to parliament as Lord Scrope of Bolton in 44 

^ A great historic peerage, T^he Earldom of Wiltes, by John Henry 




Edward III. He it was who challenged the right of the 
Grosvenors to his blue shield with the golden bend in the 
famous suit which lasted five years and ended in a judgment 
for the Scrope, who was then of such standing that a simple 
Cheshire knight could hardly have hoped for another issue. 
Readers of The Ancestor do not need to be reminded that to 
them has been given the first critical and illuminating study 
of the evidence in the great case of Scrope against Grosvenor. 

The next bearer of the golden bend was Sir William le 
Scrope, a Knight of the Garter, who brought the fortunes of 
Scrope to their highest point. He was a soldier under John 
of Gaunt, and seneschal of Aquitaine, and many governments 
and honours were given him as the years passed, he being a 
singular favourite of King Richard II. He bought the Isle of 
Man with its little kingship of the Salisburys in 1393, and in 
1396 he became Lord Chamberlain. In 1397 he was created 
Earl of Wiltshire, with remainder to his heirs male for ever. 
The list of his succeeding dignities is a long one, extending 
to the year 1399, which year saw him Lord Treasurer of 
England and guardian of the realm during the king's absence 
in Ireland. But with honours came lands and riches, for 
the earl was chief amongst those painted hoods and long 
sleeves of Richard's wasteful court, and lords and com- 
mons counted his rewards with jealous anger. The same year 
which saw a Scrope at the helm of the kingdom saw his 
head packed with two others in a white basket and sent up 
from the west country as an agreeable present to the good 
commonalty of London. Since the attainder which followed 
no Scrope has been called to the Lords as Earl of Wiltshire, 
although Mr. Scrope of Danby claimed the honour in 1859 
as heir male of the earl.^ The attainder has been challenged 
as invalid, but it was confirmed by another parliament sum- 
moned when Henry of Bolingbroke's seat upon the throne 
was assured, and there is no doubt but that the forfeiture 
was acquiesced in by the family of Scrope. The earl died 
without issue, and the modern claim to his earldom came 
from the descendant of his next brother Roger, who succeeded 
his father in 1403 as Lord Scrope of Bolton. This claim was 
based upon the language of the creation of 1397, heredihus suis 
masculis in perpetuum^ and concerning the vexed question of this 
earldom we have nothing useful to say. For us at least, as 

^ Ancestor, i. 1 1 7. 


tor the Scropes for the best part of five centuries, it is chose 
jugee^ although the unfortunate decision in the parallel case of 
the earldom of Devon has given the Scrope claim a vitality 
which it would otherwise have lacked. Nor have we, for Mr. 
Scrope's sake, any desire that the Crown should exercise its 
prerogative and revive the earldom of Wiltshire in his person. 
It is associated with but two years of the story of the Scropes. 
The romance of history is in this case with the name and not 
with the dignity. In these days of cheapened titles it surely 
carries more distinction to a Yorkshire squire to be the un- 
titled chief of a historic name than to be raised to the lords on 
a title which has little interest and few associations for any one 
but a peerage lawyer. 

Three interesting illustrations are given us by Mr. 
Metcalfe. The first is a print from the original copper plate 
of the huge bookplate of Simon Scrope of Danby, dated 
1698, showing the Scrope coat with twenty-six others quar- 
tered ' by right of Descent from Heirs General,' which include 
the usual proportion of heralds' fantasies — Mac-Morogh, King 
of Leinster ; Lupus, Earl of Chester ; Leofric, Earl of Mercia — 
and the like. It is a good specimen of armory of a dull and 
inept period. The crown from which come the feathers of 
the crest bears no relation to the helm it surmounts, and the 
meagre supporters stand on ribbon edges in the approved 
manner. A far choicer piece of armory is the seal of William 
Scrope as Lord of Man and the Isles appended to a document 
dated 1395 in the national archives of France. The shield 
bears the three legs of Man, differenced with a label for a 
reason which is not apparent, seeing that, although his father 
was alive, William Scrope was not heir of Man but its lord by 
his own purchase. The earl's portrait is the third of the 
illustrations. Mr. Metcalfe hazards that it ' may have been 
copied from an older painting,' but he is evidently unwilling 
to say more for this shameless ' portrait of an ancestor,' the 
very type of the Jacobean Romano-Gothic confections of 
whose existence he admits himself to be aware. 

It gives an especial interest to this book that it is the work 
of a Metcalfe, of a family near of kin and of ancient alliance 
with their neighbours the Scropes. We could wish that Mr. 
Metcalfe had given us in the volume some specimens of the 
great skill in armory which has given him so high a place 
amongst those who during the last half century have striven 



to raise the quality of our heraldic work. He has however 
favoured us with some copies of his bookplates designed for 
members of the house of Scrope, and these, although the 
simplicity of the charges give little scope for the fantastic 
beauty which distinguished so much of his earlier work, at 
least show that the hand of one who must be regarded as the 
doyen of English armorial art has lost none of its sureness. 


Sir Edmund Bewley, whose notices of the Irish Low- 
thers we reviewed in a former number of ne Ancestor^ 
has now completed a volume of the history of his own 
family/ The book is a good example of modern genealogical 
work. With its 158 pages of text, its six chart pedigrees, 
and its efficient indices, it goes to make one more brick in 
the building up of the history of the old English people. 

Criticism will concern itself with the second chapter of the 
book, which deals with the remote original of the Cumberland 
Bcwleys. The misty field beyond the earliest probable ancestor 
is as fascinating to the eyes of the genealogist as were the wild 
seas and waste places at the edge of the round world to the 
medieval geographer, and both genealogist and geographer are 
in the same danger. For as the old makers of world maps 
sprinkled the wonders of headless men and six-handed 
monsters on the lands beyond their kenning, even so the 
genealogist is tempted to set at the head of his charts names 
which he will never be able to connect by an honest drop 
line to the name of his first forefather. 

Let it not be imagined that Sir Edmund attempts any 
violence upon recorded fact in order to stretch his pedigree to 
greater length. He is content to derive from Thomas de 
Beaulieu of Thistlethwaite, in Castle Sowerby, who is found 
living there in 1332, which allows his decendants a span of 
pedigree which most of Sir Edmund's fellow genealogists will 
strive after in vain. But Sir Edmund although professing 
himself clean of the popular belief that a common surname 

^ The Bezvkys of Cumberland and their Irish and other descendants, with full 
pedigrees of the family from 1^3^ to the present day, by Sir Edmund Thomas 
Bewley, M.A., LL.D. (Dublin : William McGee, 1902). 


points to a common ancestry, is yet willing to write us a 
chapter concerning the doings of the Beaulieus of Hainault, 
from whom he would persuade himself that the Cumberland 
Beaulieus sprang. 

His argument would seem to be as follows, if we do him 
no injustice. 

There was a chateau and village of Beaulieu near Havre in 
Hainault. Rivers, as we know, flow by Macedon and Mon- 
mouth, and other Beaulieus are scattered about France. So 
far we are little advanced. 

A gentle family took its name from this Hainault 
Beaulieu, holding of the counts of Hainault. Even so the 
other Beaulieus were giving names to other seigneurs. 

A Hainault squire, an able man-at-arms, was serving the 
English king in France in 1379, according to one version of 
Froissart's Chronicles, or according to another version, was 
serving the French king. Here we are still far from 
Thistlethwaite in Cumberland, and the proofs that a Messire 
Richard de Beaulieu, apparently a French knight, fell at 
Poitiers, do not help the cumulative argument, for the exist- 
ence of oversea Beaulieus is not in debate. 

We come then to meet the last charge of Sir Edmund's 
massed contentions. 

In 1326, John of Hainault, brother of the count, landed 
with Queen Isabel of England at Harwich, and joined in the 
enterprise which deposed Edward II. and made his son king 
in his place. A few months afterwards the same John came 
again from Hainault and set out with the boy king in his 
first ride against the Scots, the Hainaulters fighting in the 
streets of York with the English archers who marched with 
them. Sir Edmund argues that as the Sire de Havre followed 
John of Hainault in this last journey, the house of Beaulieu, 
which held of Havre, may have sent a horseman with their 
lord. But as John's Hainaulters quitted the country, and that 
in ill odour with the English, we are no nearer to Thistlethwaite. 

In 1328 King Edward III. was married to Philippe of 
Hainault, a girl of fourteen years. In 1338 Gilbert de 
Beaulieu is named amongst the following of Queen Philippe 
when she goes over sea, and Sir Edmund assumes that this 
Gilbert was a Hainaulter who had come with her ten years 
earlier. We will not quarrel with the assumption, it is a 
probability supported by no evidence. The same Gilbert de 


Beaulieu is given for life by letters patent in 1339 the bailiwick 
of the forestership of Okedene, in Knaresborough Forest, 
being named in the letters as ' dilectus valettus ' of the 
queen, that is to say, he was a gentleman of the queen's 

The queen's confessor, Robert of Eglesfeld, was a 
Cumberland man from Eglesfeld in Brigham. A John of 
Eglesfeld of this family died in 1354, and the wardship and 
marriage of the heir was granted to Richard de Beaulieu and 
Margaret his wife, by letters patent of 1355, which Richard was 
son of Thomas of Thistlethwaithe. Sir Edmund hastens to 
record his comment on the transaction. Robert, the queen's 
confessor, may have advised the queen that his cousin's death 
will be a good occasion for rewarding one of her Hainaulters, or 
rather one of their descendants, a piece of advice which sounds 
curiously unlike what we should look for from a Cumberland 
man, layman or clerk. The occurrence of Richard's wife in 
the grant is held to suggest ' that she as well as Richard de 
Beaulieu, stood well in the favour ' of the queen. 

'There would seem,' says Sir Edmund Bewley in summing 
up (and Sir Edmund has sat upon the judicial bench), ' to 
be good grounds for attributing a Hainault origin to the de 
Beaulieus of Cumberland.' 

The facts so impartially laid before us by Sir Edmund 
compel us to record our belief that there exist no grounds 
for such an attribution. 

What does this Hainault story amount to ? We put 
aside the unnecessary matter. We concede that there were 
Seigneurs of Beaulieu in Hainault, although little be known of 
them. A Beaulieu may have followed John of Hainault in his 
two rides in England, but the evidence that John settled any 
of his men-at-arms in England during his short visits is still 
to seek, and the riot at York makes such a suggestion a highly 
unlikely one. Queen Philippe makes a grant to a Beaulieu 
in 1338, which Beaulieu, being of her household, was possibly 
a Hainaulter, although she, having been ten years queen of 
England, to which high place she came at fourteen years of 
age, might be expected to have more Englishmen round her 
than Hainaulters. 

From the Eglesfeld business we gain nothing. A Cum- 
berland man dies, and a Cumberland neighbour and his wife 
buy the wardship and marriage of his heir. The dead tenant 



was of some kinship to the queen's confessor, and the queen, 
who does not appear in the transaction, came thirty years 
before from Hainault. Therefore Beaulieu, who had the 
wardship of young Eglesfeld, is probably a descendant of a 
Hainaulter, and his wife, thus shown to be a favourite of the 
queen, a Hainaulter into the bargain ! 

Turning to Cumberland, we find that in 1332 we have 
already two landowners named Beaulieu, Thomas of Thistle- 
thwaite and Roger of Blencarne, who are brothers according 
to Sir Edmund Bewley, although no evidence appears for the 
guess. These two men, settled and landed in 1332, we are 
asked to accept as probable sons for a Gilbert de Beaulieu, of 
whom all that we know is that he is a follower of Queen 
Philippe, a grantee of a bailiwick in Yorkshire in 1339, and 
that he might have come over with the queen in 1328, only three 
or four years before the date at which we find two landed 
houses of the name in Cumberland. Such an argument 
addressed to Sir Edmund on the bench would have fared ill, 
however seductively set forth. 

The heraldic evidence, such as it is, helps nothing in the 
Hainault contention. The Beaulieus of Cumberland bore at an 
early date a shield with a cheveron between three birds' heads 
— arms unlike the Hainault shield of Beaulieu in charge and 

Sir Edmund goes too far in his eagerness to set aside the 
heraldic evidence when we find him saying that ' if the 
de Beaulieus came from Hainault in the time of Edward III. 
there is no necessary presumption that after they had settled 
in England their old arms would be retained.' On the 
contrary, there is, in default of evidence of a change by reason 
of inheritance or otherwise, a very strong presumption in 
favour of such retention. 

It is significant of Sir Edmund Bewley' s good faith as a 
genealogist, that in spite of his inclination towards a shadowy 
race-father from Hainault, he does not conceal from us his 
knowledge that in Bewley Castle, near Appleby, he has a place- 
name which might yield a more probable ancestor than the 
tenant of the lord of Havr6. Sir Edmund is of opinion that 
Bewley, or Beaulieu Castle and manor, being held by the 
Bishops of Carlisle, had their name bestowed upon them by 
Hugh, Bishop of Carlisle, who had been Abbot of Beaulieu in 



Now we dare hazard that in a single page of Sir Edmund's 
own book lies the key to the pedigree of Bewley. Here we 
have a mention of Roger Bewley (of Blencarne), which. Sir 
Edmund assures us, is the earliest finding of the name in 
Cumberland. And in what company do we find him r He is 
a defendant against the prior of Carlisle, who pleads that his 
goods and chattels at Dalston have been carried away, to the 
value of £ioo, by the said Roger, with Richard le Wayte and 
others, together -joith John^ Bishop of Carlisle^ and others. Roger, 
then, we see first as the man of the bishop, who was the lord 
of Beaulieu Castle and manor. Let Roger but be his bailiiF 
or tenant at the casde, and his name is accounted for more 
easily than by supposing that a Hainaulter who 'may have come 
to London in 1328 had within three or four years settled two 
sons as heads of north country households. 

The mere mention of Dalston in this plea provides Roger, 
thus associated with that place, with a possible ancestry, for the 
earliest versions of the arms of Beaulieu give us naught but 
the well known arms of Dalston of Dalston, the black cheveron 
between three daws' heads playing upon the name of that 
house, which Beaulieu differences in the case of a fourteenth 
century William de Beaulieu by dancing the cheveron. Here 
again Sir Edmund notes the ^ striking resemblance ' of the 
arms of Dalston and Bewley, and gives us the opinion that one 
of the great barons ' may have granted originally the arms ot 
both Dalstons and Bewleys.' But such a o-rant is in the case 
of Dalston, at least, more than improbable, for the Dalston 
coat being a punning one with no meaning or importance 
beyond the play upon a word, was undoubtedly assumed by the 
family without need of grant from a feudal lord. Sir Edmund 
does not understand that the grant of William, baron of 
Graystock, to Adam of Blencowe in 1355, which he quotes, 
stands upon a different footing, it being a grant of a version 
of the arms of Graystock, to which Adam, without the grant, 
would have had no right. In the case of nearly ail ancient 
grants of arms, it will be found that their effect is the convey- 
ance by A to B of the whole arms of A, or some portion of 
them. In the case of B assuming a new shield for himself no 
grant would be needed. 

In Sir Edmund's carefully arranged pedigrees, which bear 
upon their faces the stamp of accuracy and clear arrangement, 
we follow the fortune of an ancient and interesting family of 



northern gentry and their descendants in Ireland. Beginning 
with Thomas of Thistlethwaite, who pays a subsidy in 1332, 
and Richard, presumably his son, who succeeds him at Thistle- 
thwaite, we come in the third generation to another Richard, 
who is a knight of the shire in 1385. The next generation 
shows William, the son and heir, as a man of growing 
importance, a knight of the shire as his father was, a com- 
missioner to Scotland in 1429, and the king's escheator for 
Cumberland and Westmorland. He dies in 1434, leaving 
daughters only, so the Bewleys never come to the rank of 
a knightly house, and the line is carried on from William's 
brother, a burgess of Carlisle, whose son is probably the first 
Bewley of Hesket, a manor which his descendant, Thomas 
Bewley of Hesket, sold in 1630 to William Lawson of I sell, 
husband of his aunt Judith, and an ancestor of the beer- 
contemning baronet of our own day. 

From Matthew Bewley, a younger son living at Woodhall 
in the earlier half of the sixteenth century, comes our 
author. Sir Edmund Bewley. The descendants of Matthew 
would seem to be of the class of yeomen and husbandmen 
and are found at Woodhall until the nineteenth century, when 
the children and grandchildren of George Bewley of Woodhall, 
headmaster of Kendal school, begin to take the old name of 
Bewley far afield to Canada, Philadelphia and South Australia. 
In the time of Thomas Bewley of Haltcliffe Hall and 
Woodhall, great-grandson of Matthew Bewley, a new element 
is brought into the family history. The descendants of the 
hard-riding border gentry are taken with the fantastic creed of 
George Fox, and go meekly one by one to Carlisle jail for 
non-payment of tithes. Mungo Bewley, a younger son of 
Woodhall, and a Quaker minister, settles at Edenderry in 
King's County, where he dies in 1747. Through him a clan 
of Bewleys in Ireland and New Zealand, in the United States 
and in British India, are able to trace their clear descent from 
Thomas de Bewley of 1332, by grace, so far as the latter 
generations are concerned, to the wonderful registers of births, 
deaths and marriages which are the pride of the Quaker sect. 

Sir Edmund's book is adorned with a most interesting 
photogravure of the picture now at Brayton, of Judith Bewley, 
wife of William Lawson of Isell, whose husband bought 
Hesket of the last Bewley of the direct line. In high 
crowned hat, great ruff and wide sleeved bodice, this thin- 


lipped, thin-faced woman makes a * portrait of an ancestress,' 
which calls up at once the long and low rooms and panelled 
walls of a northern hall. The other illustration calling for a 
word is a picture of Sir Edmund's arms and crest, and this we 
notice but to remark that the crest is so displayed as to have 
no artistic or structural relation with the helmet which should 
support it. Concerning this crest of Bewley we shall have 
more to say in another number of The Ancestor, 

O. B. 


Under this heading The Ancestor will call the attention of press 
and public to much curious lore concerning genealogy^ heraldry 
and the like with which our magazines^ our reviews and news- 
papers from time to time delight us. It is a sign of awakening 
interest in such matters that the subjects with which The 
Ancestor sets itself to deal are becoming less and less the sealed 
garden of a few workers. But upon what strange food the 
growing appetite for popular archeology must feed will be 
shown in the columns before us. Our press^ the best-informed 
and the most widely sympathetic in the worldy which watches 
its record of science^ art and literature with a jealous eye^ still 
permits itself in this little corner of things^ to be victimized by 
the most recklessly furnished information^ and it would seem 
that no story is too wildly improbable to fina the widest cur- 
rency. It is no criticism for attacking s sake that we shall 
offer ^ and we have but to beg the distinguished journals from 
which we shall draw our texts for comment to take in good 
part what is offered in good faith and good humour, 

WHEN our learned contemporary the Ex Libris Journal 
would carry its interest in armory beyond the limits 
of those fascinating book labels concerning which it is the 
acknowledged guide and authority, more than one of its 
writers may be followed with some pleasure and profit by the 
seeker for material which should fall under the heading of 
these paragraphs. The Rise of Heraldry is there found a 
pleasant text for the harmless speculations of those to whom 
a desire for exact evidence as a base for speculation is a tire- 
some pedantry. We draw a passage at hazard : — 

I am among those who hold that heraldry, as now understood, first arose 
in the wearing of * coats of arms ' or surcoats of silk or other light material, at 
the time of the crusades, and that these were worn above the war harness or 
vesture and thus incorporated the sash or shield suspender as the Bend, the 
military girdle as the Fess, beside other ornaments and portions of apparel of 
the nobles, knights and priests. Of this fact traces are to be found throughout 
heraldry as well as among many early writers, and even in the very name of a 
* coat of arms' ; and yet there are but few modern treatises on heraldry — how- 



ever learned the authors — which do not start with the positive statement that 
coats of arms were first represented on shields ! The tabards of our heralds 
represent the original * coat of arms.' 

Arms borne upon a coat are then older than arms upon 
shields — but for the support of such a theory we shall need 
certain evidences. First let us seek for our earliest examples 
of European armory and note whether they be borne upon 
coats or upon shields. Secondly, if we attach importance in 
this regard to the phrase of ' coat of arms ' let us ascertain 
whether it be older in language than ' shield of arms.' The 
absurdity of the belt and scarf theory is surely obvious when we 
consider its full force. Every knight, let us say, has ' a sash 
or shield suspender ' ; every knight has a ' military girdle.' 
Therefore every knight begins his armorial career equipped 
already with a coat of arms which bears a fesse and a bend, to 
say nothing of the additional charges supplied by his ' other 
ornaments and portions of apparel.' And as we who are 
familiar with the earliest armory know that it begins in western 
Europe with an abundant brood of fierce lions ramping in all 
the colours of the rainbow, we may well ask whereabouts in 
his costume the knight wore his lion, if it be not where the 
Spartan boy wore the fox cub. 

* * * 

A fresh paragraph brings us to a quotation of the late Mr. 
Smith Ellis, who 'gave particular emphasis to the fact that in 
the tenth century Henry I., Emperor of Germany, called 
Henry the Fowler, issued a code of tournament laws called 
"Leges Hasti-ludiales," which afford unequivocal proofs of the 
long established usage of family ensigns or symbols, of the 
existence of heralds to register and regulate them, and evidence 
of their being regarded as marks of honour and the especial 
privilege of the nobly born.' 

We venture to correct Mr. W. Cecil Wade. If the laws 
of Henry the Fowler indeed show that the Imperial College of 
Heralds were keeping an armorial register some five hundred 
years before our own officers had entered upon their duties, to 
what purpose are bewildered English antiquaries groping in the 
twelfth century for the origins of armory ? But doubtless Mr. 
Wade has been since informed by his editor that the famous 
Leges Hasti-ludiales are the forged decretals of heraldry, and 


that Mr. W. Cecil Wade remains the one orthodox believer 
in their authenticity, although the ingenious Georg Ruxner, 
Jerusalem Herald, and true author and begetter of the Leges 
Hasti-ludiales, once had a larger audience. 

* * * 

A more modern legend is as eagerly swallowed by Mr. 
Wade. It is the legend of the crusaders' swords which came 
hewing at poor Tommy when Fuzzy Wuzzy rushed at the 
British square. ' I have the highest military authority for 
stating that the Emirs told our officers that the great cross- 
hilted swords which were captured from them in the recent 
Soudan battles were originally possessed by the Crusaders.' 
Now one of these ' great cross-hilted swords ' may be readily 
bought in a London sale-room or pawnbroker's shop for a 
pound or so. A sword which an expert will vouch for as a 
sword of the days of the Crusaders may label itself at many 
times its weight in silver and be sure of finding a purchaser. 
These be facts for which any dealer in curiosities will be our 
witness, and before them the legend of the crusaders' swords 
may reconsider itself. An old sword blade has turned up at 
rare intervals in the desert to which so many odd matters find 
their way, but nothing goes to show that the Mahdi's prede- 
cessors were such large purchasers of cast war material at the 
end of the crusades as the legend would have us believe. 

* * * 

We can spare the Ex Libris Journal one more note, as the 
Ex Libris Journal is important from the point of view of this 
column in that it is a well-known magazine for antiquaries, or 
at least for those interested in antiquarian matters. The origin 
of armory is still puzzling its writers and correspondents, one 
of whom urges us to consider seriously whether certain arms 
did not give rise to certain surnames, as for example the wolf s 
head shield to the name of Lupus, and the corbie-crow shield 
to the name of Corbet. That such speculations should be 
possible in our day shows only too clearly how far the intelli- 
gent study of armory which the work of Planche and Perceval 
should have set on foot has degenerated to intellectual potter- 
ing. By this time the very sucklings of the modern archaeo- 
logical spirit should be protesting against such aimless guesses 
finding their way into print. For Corbet, is it not enough to 
say that this ancient house begins with the ' Roger son of 



Corbet' of the Domesday Survey? If the name then be 
derived from the arms, those arms must have existed before 
the conquest of England, and the Leges Hasti-ludiales are 
our sole authority for pre-conquest heraldry. For the Lupus 
shield we may say that no one in England was ever called 
Lupus to our knowledge but the late Duke of Westminster. 
Hugh of Avranches, with whom the duke's family was con- 
nected by a genealogical myth, was certainly called Lupus by 
certain chroniclers who wrote of him after his death, but this 
for the reason that they were writing in Latin. Hugh there- 
fore was not surnamed Lupus or the Wolf in his lifetime, and 
as he died in i loi he could have borne no arms. The wolf s- 
head shield is a fantasy provided for him by the later heralds, 
which has served as an additional quartering for the many score 
of gentlemen persuaded that they were the representatives of 
Hugh the Fat. 

* * * 

From Flamstead^ its Church and History^ by its vicar, the 
Rev. L Vincent BuUard, we cull an unusually fine specimen 
of a family armorial myth. Sir Edgar Sebright, head of a 
family long connected with Flamstead, contributes a chapter 
on his pedigree. 1 It has been a tradition, it seems, in the 
Sebright family that they must look to Sebert, King of 
Essex, as their founder. This tale Sir Edgar gives with due 
caution as ' only a family tradition.' But he feels himself on 
sure ground when he relates that his ancestor Walter Sebright, 
who lived at ' Sebright Hall ' in Essex under Henry II., 
quartered the arms ' azure 6 Besants or ' of his ancestors of the 
ancient family of Bissett. ' He married the daughter and sole 
heiress of Sir Henry de Ashe, Knight, and his descendants 
quarter the Bissett and de Ashe arms, which thus came into 
their family about 750 years ago. It may be of interest here 
to mention that the oldest conveyance of land which the British 
Museum contains is a settlement of some land made by Peter 
Sebright, grandson of Walter above mentioned, on his son 
Mabell Sebright and his wife Katherine, executed in the 
22 year of King Edward the First.' 

* * * 

A family legend is of little worth unless it bestow upon 
the family some noble singularity. Walter Sebright in this 
legend, although himself living at a time when the first scanty 


beginnings of armory are showing themselves, was quartering 
the arms of Bissett some hundred and fifty years before we 
find the earliest English example of a quartered shield. The 
Bissetts were evidently bearing their shield of ' azure 6 Besants 
or ' before armory itself began, although the claims of the 
family of Sir Henry de Ashe, Knight, must have come near to 
rivalling them in this matter. 

« « « 

One cannot guess at the origin of the really amazing legend 
of the most ancient deed. The conveyances of land in the 
British Museum begin with Assyrian baked bricks and 
Egyptian papyri. For English deeds Sir Edgar will find that 
there is hardly a country attorney but can tumble out of a 
client's muniment box a score of older deeds of land than the 
Sebright conveyance. A hundred such lie on the table before 
this present writer. 

« « « 

The writer of these lines once sought for the most famous 
Englishman of history, and found him, to his own mind, in Guy 
Fawkes. Countrymen of his who have forgotten Chaucer and 
Sir Philip Sydney remember their Guy Fawkes. Guy's attempt 
is remembered by those to whom the achievements of Caxton 
or Pitt are naught. Glorious in his failure he remains firm on 
his historic legs when oblivion has snatched his smouldering 
match and blown every member of King James's parlia- 
ment out of men's minds. Yet his twilight is near. He shall 
receive a sudden blow, this Guy Fawkes, if his restless spirit 
ever encounter the daily press of a degenerate day when ' spade 
work ' on the part of His Majesty's Opposition is a phrase 
carrying nothing of the meaning which his vigorous mind 
read into it. 

* * * 

A bearer of Guy's name has lately taken his place in the 
list of rear-admirals. It seemed good to the Admiralty that he 
should hoist his new pennant on the Fifth of November. 
Thereat a Service journal became wrath, and said in its anger 
that this thing should not come to pass. That a Fawkes 
should be bidden to hoist his pennant on the great festival of 
Blessed Guy was an unseemly joke, an insult to Rear-Admiral 
Fawkes — to the navy — to the country, a thing to hasten the 
Service even faster on its doomed way to the dogs. Then 



arose a mild morning newspaper and would with mild words 
have calmed the outcry of the Service paper, as with deft 
handkerchief the nose of the weeping child is wiped. No 
insult, said the morning newspaper, could have been aimed at 
the gallant rear-admiral. His family, the morning newspaper 
was assured, was of the most respectable, and settled in the 
north country for more than three centuries before the arrival 
of Guido, 

* * * 

There in a word we have it. Guy Fawkes is cast off and 
disowned of his countrymen. Yet more Fawkes was he than 
the good rear-admiral himself, who is Fawkes only on the 
distaff side. He was a Fawkes whom the admiral's family had 
called cousins with, although the exact place of his grandsire in 
the pedigree was unascertained. He was a child of Yorkshire, 
son and grandson of honoured citizens of York,^ English of 
the English, yet for the morning newspaper he is a foreigner, 
one who ' arrived ' as any obscure and undesirable alien might 
arrive, and Guy's dark lantern is gone out before his niche. 
Truly this matter of fame is a vaporous thing. 

^ Chance has it that in Mr. Baildon's article on Yorkshire wills in this 
present number of The Ancestor we find mention of a legacy given to the young 
Guy Fawkes. %^ 







Bartolomeo Liviano de Alviano (No. XVI) 

THE charm of this portrait is impossible to convey either 
by description in words or by pictured reproduction. It 
lies partly in the colour and partly in the manner of the paint- 
ing. Partly also because it is typically the portrait of an 
Italian of the fifteenth century, and involuntarily brings to our 
minds visions of all the princely youths from the picture 
galleries of Venice, Florence and Rome. The white shirt 
with broad black bands in the fashion of the Renaissance, en- 
riched by a yellow (originally gilded) pattern of vases, dolphins, 
caducei and cornucopias, the fine golden-brown hair, some 
locks of which curl their way along the edge of the round 
black cap, the pale though warm complexion and the long 
contemptuous mouth combine to give that air of pride of 
race wedded to a scepticism of all things, of physical strength 
and of wealth, which we are accustomed to associate with 
the men of the Golden Age. Mr. Scharf infers from the 
style of painting that it is either the work of Antonello da 
Messina or Roger van der Weyden. The details are treated 
with a Flemish solidity of workmanship, while the exquisite 
colour and lightness of the touch betray Italian influence. 
Roger van der Weyden's residence in Italy might account for 
a combination of the two styles. Antonello died a year after 
the discovery of America, and van der Weyden pre-deceased 
him by thirty-two years. The panel is not of oak, but prob- 
ably of poplar, a wood much used by Italians, and on the 
back are still traces of old writing, too much worn to decipher. 
The Rev. Thomas Kerrich, to whom the Society owes this 
work, pasted the name by which it is known on a slip at the 
back, and in black ink on the side of the panel is marked the 
date when it was acquired, thus — 


It is just under ij ft. by i ft. in size, and is certainly one of 
the most beautiful portraits the Society owns. 

Bar roi.OiMKO Ln iANO de Ai.x'iano. 



Henry V. (No. XV) 

In Rapin and Tindal's History of England there is the fol- 
lowing description of Henry V.'s person : — 

It is certain he had all the Endowments of Body and Mind required to 
form a great Man. His Stature was tall and majestick, though a little too 
slender and long necked. His hair was black and his eyes of the same colour 
were exceeding lively. 

The somewhat melancholy presentment of Henry V. here 
reproduced hardly corresponds to this description ; indeed the 
black and lively eye is replaced by a blue one, and the majesty 
of the countenance has escaped the notice of the artist. But, 
as this picture is a copy, one of many made either contem- 
porarily or later, the characteristics have become obliterated. 
The portraits in the National Gallery and the one in the 
royal collection at Windsor are stronger and more lifelike. 
The features are similar and very regular, and the close cropped 
brown hair is shaven behind the ears according to the old 
Norman fashion in all the pictures. In the engraving done 
by Vertue for Rapin's history quoted above, the effect is con- 
siderably altered by the introduction of a cap and crown on 
the head and the orb and cross in the left hand. The small 
vignette in Sandford's Genealogical History of England was also 
apparently taken from the picture now at Windsor, modified 
by the addition of a crown and a sword in the right hand. 
Here too the expression of the countenance is more cheerful 
and the lower lips more determined. 

The tomb in Westminster bears the same character as 
the Windsor portrait ; an engraving of it in Sandford (pub- 
lished 1 707) is thus described : — 

Here you have the Form of this Monument of Grey Marble, as it now 
remains, but of the Head of his Effigies, Covering of his Trunk, and his Re- 
galia (having been all of silver, and stolen away) are supplied by this Shadow, 
copied from an original picture of him in the Royal Palace of White-Hall. 

The picture is painted on a panel i ft. 4j- in. by i ft. 9J in. 

KiN(; Henry V. 



Margaret of York (No. XIX) 

The marriage of Margaret of York to Charles the Bold, the 
last Duke of Burgundy of the French line, in 1468 was cele- 
brated with a splendour which taxed even the heralds' powers 
of description.^ It was an event of importance in European 
history, and Louis XL had done his utmost to thwart it by 
suggesting Philibert, Prince of Savoy, as a husband. But the 
alliance of Charles with Margaret was consummated, and its 
importance was seen when two years later Edward IV. ap- 
pealed to his brother-in-law and obtained assistance to recover 
his throne. Hugo van der Goes, a native of Ghent, was em- 
ployed on the decorations for the wedding, and Mr. Scharf 
suggests that the portrait here reproduced was probably 
painted by him. He says that 'his long experience and 
practice both as a decorator and painter of historical subjects 
on walls, as well in Italy as in his own country, would satis- 
factorily account for the force and largeness of style which 
distinguish the picture.' Margaret's face is not attractive. It 
is pale with bright scarlet lips, and the hair is entirely con- 
cealed by a black cap from which falls a gauze veil. Her 
features are regular, though the chin recedes slightly and the 
eyes look oriental. She seems to have been possessed of 
good business capacities, for we read of her coming over to 
England after she became a widow, to arrange for licences to 
export oxen, sheep and wool to Flanders free of customs. 
She was deprived of a large part of her dowry when Henry 
came to the throne, and to this, besides party spirit, may be 
ascribed her encouragement of Perkin Warbeck and Lambert 
Simnel. She was thus at one time a patroness of disaffected 
Englishmen. During a short period in her service Caxton 
acquired the art of printing books. In 1500 she became 
godmother to Charles V. He was a grandson of her hus- 
band's and named after him. 

The picture is painted on an oak panel, and on the square 

brown frame, partly above and pardy below, is the following 

inscription in gold letters : — 


It has been engraved in the Paston letters by Facius and was 
bequeathed to the Society by the Rev. Thomas Kerrich. 

^ Dictionary of National Biography. 

Makgakkt of Vokk. 


Richard III. (No. XXI) 

Richard III. has been surnamed the Hunchback, and we 
have been told that his left shoulder was higher than the 
right. The tradition of his deformed appearance has always 
been closely foUowed by artists in modern times (see, for 
example. Abbey's picture of him as the Duke of Gloucester). 
But in no contemporary portrait is the defect shown distinctly, 
and the one here reproduced is no exception to the rule. 
The expression of the face is anxious, and the pale grey eyes 
have that look of cunning we are accustomed to associate 
with his character. Though he performed feats of prowess 
on the battlefield there is nothing warlike in his appearance.' 
The picture is larger than the one reproduced in the last num- 
ber of ^he Ancestor^ being 19 in. by 14 in. The sword which 
is held in the right hand in front of the left shoulder is de- 
scribed in Mr. Scharf's catalogue as silvered half way up the 
blade, the rest of the blade being in shadow, giving the ap- 
pearance of the sword being broken. Since the catalogue was 
written the picture has been cleaned, and it is now apparent 
that the sword is intentionally painted as broken. The 
shadow was a dark streak of surface paint, while the back- 
ground, described as brown, is now found to be dark olive 
green. It is at least possible that the picture is a commemora- 
tive one, painted after the sword of York was broken at 
Bosworth field. 

This picture was bequeathed to the Society by the Rev. 
Thomas Kerrich, and came into his possession in 1783. 

KiN(; Richard III. 


Jan SchooreLj the Painter (No. XXXVIII) 

[Painted by Sir Antonio More] 

This portrait was a tribute from pupil to master ; it forms 
a link between Antonio More and Dilrer. For Jan Schoorel 
studied under Dtlrer, and Antonio Mor, or Moor, called in 
England Sir Antonio More, and in Spain Moro, was Schoorel's 
pupil. The inscription below the portrait is as follows : — 


Schoorel is a small village near Alkmaar, and the artist 
took his name from that, his birthplace. He was a great 
traveller, and not only made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, but 
went to Venice and Rome, where he painted a full length 
portrait of the pope, Adrian VI., who was his fellow country- 
man. His best picture represents ' Christ's entry into Jeru- 
salem,' and was painted for his patrons, the noble family of 
Lochorst, at Utrecht. The two pictures by him in the National 
Gallery are the ' Holy Family at a fountain ' and the ^ Portrait 
of a lady,' both tender in feeling and beautiful in colour, 
though somewhat poor in drawing, and both presented by 
Queen Victoria. More was born at Utrecht, but when he was 
recommended to Charles V. by Granvella, migrated to Spain 
and painted many members of the royal house. He was only 
a short time in England when he came to paint Queen Mary 
before her marriage with Philip. He was treated with great 
intimacy by Philip, but that familiarity was near to becoming 
his ruin, and he was finally obliged to flee from Spain. He 
returned to the Netherlands and was there patronized by 
Alva. His work shows the influence of Holbein. The 
colour is warm and the drawing is forcible. This portrait 
is described as much damaged, but the injuries are slight and 
have not materially affected its artistic beauty. That he could 
do finer work the portrait of Sir Thomas Gresham at the 
National Portrait Gallery testifies, but he did not paint many 
such, and the Society is fortunate in possessing the Jan 

The diameter of the picture is 22 in., and it is painted 
on a wooden panel which is not oak. It was bequeathed to 
the Society by the Rev. Thomas Kerrich. 

Jan ScHOORiiL, Tiiii Painter. 



William Burton, the Leicestershire Antiquary 

(No. XLII) 

William Burton, who was born in 1575, was a thinker, 
linguist and scholar, and was the author of almost the first 
attempt at County History. He was intended for the Bar 
and was a member of the Inner Temple, but his delicate 
health prevented him from practising and led him to devote 
himself to the study of heraldry, topography and antiquities. 
He had a knowledge of Spanish and Italian, and studied em- 
blem writers, and finally occupied himself seriously with his 
Description of Leicestershire.^ From a MS. ' Valediction to the 
Reader,' dated from Lindley 1641, in an interleaved copy 
which he had revised and enlarged for a second edition, we 
learn that as far back as 1597 the book was begun, ^not with 
an intendment that it should ever come to the public view, 
but for my own private use, which after it had slept a long 
time, was on a sudden raised out of the dust and by the force 
of a higher power drawn to the press, having scarce an 
allowance of time for the furbishing and putting on a mantle ' 
(Nichol's Leicestershire^ iii. xvi.). The ' higher power ' was his 
patron, George, Marquis of Buckingham, to whom the work 
was dedicated on publication (in folio) in 1662. Almost all 
the information contained in Burton's book was later em- 
bodied in Nichol, and if the discursive matter had been 
omitted would have formed but a slender volume ; its chief 
merit lay in the fact of its being one of the first of its kind. 

His portrait shows us a kindly delicate face, with a clear 
fair complexion, large blue eyes and short brown hair. The 
face is well painted, though the reflected lights are a trifle over- 
done. The hands are som.ewhat stifle, and the ruffle is a heavy 
grey. But the coat of arms painted on one side on the back- 
ground and the medallion on the other are very perfect in 
execution and are clean and fresh in colour, the green of the 
manding being noticeably good. The scutcheon of his arms 
has twelve quarterings and two crests and the motto ' Lux 
Vita.'^ On the tablet on the opposite side is written the 
following inscription : — 

^ Dictionary of National Biography. 

^ The original drawing of this shield with its two crested helms may be 
found in a MS. now in my own possession. — Ed. 

William BurtoiN', tul LEicLbi i.rsiiiue ArsTiQUAKV, 



WiLLMus Burton 

filius natu maximus Radulfi Burton de Lindley, com. 
Leic. armig. Socius Interioris Templi et Apprenti- 
cius legum Angliae, 25 Aug : 1604 An : 

At. 29. 

From this tablet on the medallion with his impresa^ namely 
the figure of Death seated, holding a chaplet on his knees and 
resting his feet on a coffin, there is inscribed, ' Hie terminus ad 
quem,' and on a scroll issuing out of the mouth of the figure 
is written, 'Mira cogalardon.' 

The picture is painted on a panel 2 ft. 4|- in. by nearly 3 ft., 
and presented to the Society in 1837 by Robert Bigsby. 



The Very Rev. Jeremiah Milles, D.D. (No. XLIV) 

In the year 1768 the Very Rev. Jeremiah Milles, Dean of 
Exeter, became President of the Society of Antiquaries and 
held the office till his death. He had previously been a 
Fellow for twenty-seven years, and his successor in the office 
of President presented the portrait here reproduced to the 
Society. It is a copy by Miss Black from the original in the 
possession of the dean's family, and shows us a robust middle- 
aged man in a full clergyman's wig. His expression is 
cheerful, and he appears somewhat material for his spiritual 
calling. He suffered, indeed, from no lack of worldly goods, 
and besides having a large private fortune, inherited from his 
uncle, Bishop Milles, continued to hold valuable rectorships 
until he became Dean of Exeter in 1762. He was from early 
life interested in archaeology. His reputation suffered by his 
rushing into the Chatterton dispute, of which S. T. Coleridge 
wrote that he ' fouUy calumniated Chatterton, an owl mangling 
a poor dead nightingale,' and that ' though only a dean he 
was in dulness and malignity most episcopally eminent.' 

He was happy in his family, and his sons, referred to by 
Miss Burney, were ' very agreeable and amiable,' appearing 
^to regard their father only as an elder brother.' Richard 
Gough also speaks of the dean's ' domestic happiness.' 

The head is life-size on a canvas 2 ft. by 2 ft. 6 in., and 
is painted in a smooth uninteresting style, but belongs to a 
good school. 

The Very Rev. Jeremiah Mieees, D.D. 



Edward Harley, Second Earl of Oxford (No. L) 

To the prodigality of the second Earl of Oxford and the 
frugal mind of his widow the British Museum owes the enor- 
mous collection of books, prints, pamphlets and manuscripts 
known as the Harleian Manuscripts. The collection was begun 
by the first earl, the celebrated minister, and his son Edward 
spent a large part of his fortune in adding to it. After his 
death, his widow, who took no interest in literary matters, 
sold 50,000 printed books, 41,000 prints and 360,000 pam- 
phlets for 1 3,000, or rather less than the cost of binding. 
This was in the year 1742, and in the year 1754 the British 
Museum acquired the collection, also extraordinarily below its 
value. The vast sums Lord Oxford had spent on his collec- 
tion and on Wimpole^ etc., were the cause of financial embarrass- 
ments, but when these reached a crisis in 1738, and he sold 
JVimpole to pay off a debt of 100,000, his position seemed 
little better. Of the ;^500,ooo his wife (the only daughter 
and heir of the Duke of Newcastle) brought him, ;^400,ooo 
is said to have been sacrificed to ' indolence, good nature and 
want of worldly wisdom.' Lord Oxford was a friend of wits 
and poets, and his library was at their disposal. He was de- 
voted to Pope, whom his wife hated ; Swift, Samuel Palmer, 
Joseph Ames, Zachary Grey, and many others frequented his 
house. He sought to drown his cares in wine and died at 
the age of fifty-two. 

The portrait here reproduced seems to be characteristic 
of the man ; it is carefully painted but is not a strong work. 
The crimson dressing gown with its lining of pale blue is well 
treated and shows feeling for colour and drapery. On the 
back of the canvas is written : ' The Rt. Hon^^- Edward Earl 
of Oxford and Earl of Mortimar, the proprietor and collector 
of the Harlean Mus"!" Library. Died 1 741 ; aged 52. M. Dahl. 

It was presented to the Society by George Vertue in Feb- 
ruary 1755. 


Edward, SecOiND ICarl of Oxford. 


THE announcement made some years ago that Traf- 
ford Park had been sold to Mr. Hooley gave rise to 
many sage reflections upon the mutability of human affairs. 
Heads were gravely shaken, and much good ink and paper 
wasted in lamenting that the Traffords were at last severed 
from the home that had been theirs from time immemorial. 
I say wasted advisedly, not that I intend, with Shirley and 
Mr. Round, to scoff at the family and their antiquity. On 
the contrary, I believe that Sir Humphrey may with good 
reason claim to be the descendant, as well as the successor in 
title, of the thegn who held Trafford ere the Norman was yet 
in the land. But when last in Manchester I was informed on 
excellent authority that he was still owner of Trafford ; and 
for aught I know he is to this day. 

On the Chester road, between the park gates and Old 
Trafford railway station, may be seen a range of low buildings 
lying a little back from the highway behind some big thorn 
trees. There is nothing in their appearance either distin- 
guished or picturesque : they present in fact their hinder parts 
to our view, while the true front is concealed by a high wall. 
Though a building of brick and timber, the whole has been 
covered with a coat of rough cast, so that neither date nor 
character can be discerned. Modern slate roofs and sash 
windows complete the disguise. But that is the Old Hall of 
Trafford ; and though for several generations it has ceased to 
be the residence of the family, the name clings to it still. 

At the time of Leland's visit, nearly 400 years ago, there 
was a park at Trafford ; but that is not the park we know.^ 
None of the old county maps are sufficiently accurate to de- 
termine its exact position and extent, but it probably lay 
between the old road (long since diverted) and the boundary 
of Manchester parish. After about 1770, when the Duke of 
Bridge water's canals had cut up that area, we find a new park 
further to the west, in the loop of the Irwell, subsequently en- 

^ The territory of the TrafFord Park Estates (limited) does, I believe, in- 
clude a portion of the ancient park. 

205 O 



larged by the inclusion of a newly drained moss and other 

Marching with Manchester on that side is another large 
parish, taking its name of Eccles from the kirk town, and in- 
cluding the capital manor of Barton upon Irwell with its 
members. Two of these, Davyhulme and Whickleswick, as 
the old maps show, occupied the portion lying on the left 
bank of Irwell, bounded on the south by Flixton and on the 
east by Manchester ; and it is Whickleswick that disappears 
to make way for Trafford Park. Its old gabled manor house 
yet forms an insignificant portion of the great rambling 
modern hall ; the hamlet has been demolished to lay out a 
kitchen garden ; and on the large scale ordnance map of to- 
day one of the park plantations alone preserves the ancient 
name. But if Whickleswick has thus been wiped off the face 
of the earth, and even the name has all but perished, the 
TrafFords have made amends by preserving a series of 
evidences, thanks to which we can trace the history of the 
township from remote times.^ 

Early in the seventeenth century was drawn up 'a Pedegree 
with a Breviat,' or abstract of title, the former (see next 
page) of which may serve to introduce the narrative that 

Our history begins with a grant, or quitclaim, from the 
lord of Barton, thus abstracted in the Breviat : — 

Sans date. Gilbert of Barton gave confirmed and released to Mathew 
the son of William Lalyng and to Margery Neece of sayd Gilbert for 
Marr^ all his right and claim in the Manor of Quyckleswyk (within meeres) 
with th'app*^ lib'ties com'odities and easem^^ free lands in all places in y® town 
of Barton (except Boylsnap) yielding to s*^ Gilbert and his heirs the annual 
rent for all services, viz. x</. per ann*. This is Soccage tenure & of the Lord 
of Barton. 

The name Lalyng is quite unknown to me ; and it is a 
rather suspicious circumstance that the grantor's brother, who 

^ I have not enjoyed the privilege of access to the TralFord muniments, 
but only to copies made by the late Canon Raines (Chetham Library, Raines 
MSS. vol. XXV.), from which the following particulars are in great part taken. 
Unfortunately, despite his diligence. Canon Raines' scholarship leaves much to 
be desired ; and I have had to take his copies as I found them. Where no 
other reference is given, it may be assumed that the Raines MS. is my 



Willelmus Laling dominus 
de Quickleswick [sic) 

Matheus Laling dominus = Margeria nepos (sic) 
de Quickleswick Gilberti de Barton 

Rogerus de Penulbury 
dominus de Quickleswyk 

Helias de Penulbury 
dominus de Quickleswyk 

Matilda de Penulbury 
domina de Quickleswicke 
fuit nupta sed obiit sine 

Beatrix de Penulbury 
released to Adam 
lord of Prestwiche 

Willelmus de Penulbury 
dominus de Quickleswyk 

hee did enfeoff 

Adam de Prestwyche 
dominus de Quickleswyke 

de Prestwich 

Elena de 

Henricus de Prestewyche 
dominus de Wickleswick 

Margeria de 

Johanna de 

Johannes filius Rob = Catherine de Prestewych 
de Boulde | domina de Quickleswyck 

Galfridus de Boulde 
dominus de Quickleswyk 

Nicholas de Boulde 

Hugo Massye filius = Agnes de Boulde 
Galfridi Massye militis domina de Wickleswicke 



was lord of Withington, is commonly styled Matthew son of 
William. There are other details which suggest that the ab- 
stract is scarcely accurate ; but I have found no other copy of 
this deed, and have no means of checking it. Gilbert suc- 
ceeded his grandmother in 1222, and was living in 1255, but 
dead in 1260.^ 

The next tenant known to the Breviat is Roger de Penul- 
bury, whose title is not shown, nor am I able satisfactorily to 
account for it. But meanwhile there are other interests aris- 
ing in Whickleswick. William de Eccles, clerk, is frequently 
a witness of Barton charters, and it seems he had a son of 
the same name. Both are met with again in the Coucher 
Book of Whalley Abbey ; indeed the two occur together, as 
father and son, on at least one occasion. William son of 
William the clerk of Eccles has a grant, or release, from 
Agnes daughter of Sir Gilbert de Barton of land in Barton 
called Crosfeld. Whether this was in Whickleswick I do not 
know ; but the younger William had a sister Alice, who occurs 
as Alice de Quikleswyk in the Coucher Book,^ and she makes 
a quitclaim of her right there to Roger de Penulbury ; while 
her son Robert will be found, many years later, engaged in 
litigation with William son of Roger.^ 

By another charter the same Agnes grants to Elias son of 
Adam de Holum lands in Barton and Holm ; but the copy I 
have is not very intelligible. In a charter of John ' son and 
heir ' of Sir Gilbert de Barton, Thomas son of Adam de 
Hulm* and Adam son of Thomas de Hulm are both named 
(along with William de Eccles, clerk, and Elias de Barton) 
among the principal under-tenants of Barton. Again I can- 
not identify these estates ; but we find a John de Hulm con- 
veying land in Whickleswick by the following charter : — 

Sciant &c. ego Joh'es de Hulm dedi &c. Ade de Penulb'i pro homagio 
suo & servicio totam terram meam de Q kleswic et sex bovate ^ terre in feodo 
& hereditate, reddendo unum par calcarium de ferro ad pasch. Hiis testibus 
Rob' de Bur', Ad' de Heton, Rob' de Heton, Elia de Pen'lbur', Rad' de 

^ Roberts, Excerpta e Rot. Fin.-, Fines Lane; Ches. Plea Roll m. 6. 

* Chetham Soc. p. 66. 

2 In the years 1301, 1302. See Assize Rolls 1321, m. 3; 418, m. 13. 

* Is he the Thomas de Quikleswyk who witnesses a charter of Roger de 
Penhulbury in the Whalley Coucher Book, p. 67 ? 

^ Sic. Perhaps sextam partem unius bovate, rather than sex hovatas, should be 
read. See below. 


Most', Rob'to cl'ico mamcestr', Henr' de T^fFord, Ade (sic) de Urmston, Ric' 
de Schoreswrth. 

Following this there is the quitclaim of Quickleswike already 
mentioned, made to Roger de Penelbury by Alice daughter of 
William the clerk, and witnessed by Sir Geoffrey de Chetham 
and others. Next we have a release by Elias son of Roger de 
Penlebury to his father, and a grant by Roger to Elias his son 
and heir, also witnessed by Sir Geoffrey/ These deeds are 
not included in the Breviat, nor is a quitclaim, dated in Sep- 
tember 1 9 Edward I., by Adam son of Alexander de Pilkinton 
(whose interest in the manor came through Maud his wife) to 
William son of Roger de Pennilbury. The Breviat has how- 
ever William's conveyance of the manor which he had by 
the death of Maud the daughter of EUys of Penulbury his 
first begotten brother ') to Adam of Prestewych ; and a release, 
dated 27 Edward I., by Beatrice, also called daughter of EUys, 
or Elias. Two deeds by her of that year, conveying Whickles- 
wick to Prestwich, are found among the Trafford muniments ; 
also a release to him by Adam de Pilkington, dated 19 
Edward I., and a deed of Adam de Hulme (probably of about 
that date) which appears to be a release to Adam de Prestwych 
of his homage and a rent of id, due from him for one-sixth 
of the manor ; but of this the copyist has made little sense. 
Adam de Hulme was no doubt the representative of John, 
and the rent, I suppose, the equivalent of the spurs in the 
older charter. Finally, as late as 1331, Beatrice daughter of 
Elias quitclaims to Henry de Prestwich. 

In the pedigree of Penulbury there is much that remains 
obscure. Elias son of Robert, founder of the family, flourished 
in the reigns of Richard I. and John. Still earlier, Albert 
Grelle the younger, who died in 11 82, had granted him 
Slivehal.^ John, while Count of Mortain, gave him Pendle- 
bury, from which he took his name, and the lucrative office of 
bailiff in the royal hundred of Salfordshire, confirming both 
these grants upon his accession.^ In the survey of 12 10 this es- 

^ The exact sequence and provisions of these two deeds would no doubt 
be more apparent if the originals were before us. 
^ Knights' fees i ; Testa de Nevill. 

^ So it is clearly stated in the Charter Roll. Mr. Farrer {Lane. Fines, pp. 
87 n, 188 n) says the grant was to Robert his father. Robert de Penulburi 
and Adam his son witness a grant of land in Stretford made by Hamon de 
Masci to Henry son of Robert de Trafford, if Canon Raines may be trusted. But 



tate is described as nine bovates in Pendlebury and Chadeswrthe 
(Shoresworth ?), held in chief in thanage by the service of 1 2 j., 
whereof Richard, Adam, Henry and Robert his nephews then 
held one bovate under him for 2s. He also held at this time 
one bovate in Pendleton of Jorwerth de Hulton,^ and had 
previously conveyed a property called Guildhouses in With- 
ington, held of Matthew son of William, lord of that manor, 
to Henry de Trafford, subject to a perpetual rent of 35. or 4J. 

In 12 1 8 Elias was dead, and Adam his son had succeeded 
to his office of bailiff. A year later Adam had livery of one 
carucate in Pendlebury and one-fourth of a bovate in Shores- 
worth as his father's heir.^ In 12 16 he had been granted the 
wardship of the heir of Little Bolton as a reward for good 
service in Lancaster Castle. He is one of the witnesses to 
an agreement between Sir Robert de Grelle and Jorwerth de 
Hulton's daughter ' in the year that the king's brother was 
made Earl of Cornwall' (1225 }), The conveyance to him of 
an estate in Whickleswick has been mentioned already. 

Roger de Penulbury was, I suppose, the heir of Adam,^ for 
we find him releasing to Henry de Trafford the homage and 
service, or rent, reserved by Elias, whereupon Trafford attorns 
tenant to Simon de Gousul, then lord of Withington. In 
1 246 he was suing Roger son of Elias (perhaps an uncle) and 
John son of Robert for land in Haleghton,* but without suc- 
cess ; and in the same year Amice wife of Thomas de Pennel- 
biry recovered part of a property she claimed in Holland.^ 
Roger's name is found as witness to a great number of char- 
ters between about 1240 and 1280, and he is mentioned 
among the principal under-tenants of Barton in a grant made 
by John ^ son and heir ' of Gilbert de Barton to Robert 

for that I should be inclined to conjecture that Elias was brother, as well as 
contemporary and neighbour, of the lord of Trafford. In 1202 he made an 
abortive claim to land in Wolvemor {La7ic. Fines, p. 16). 

^ Knights' fees ; Tesia de TSev'ill\ Lane. Pipe Rolls, 224, 231 ; Red Book 
of the Exchequer, p. 573. 

^ Memoranda Roll, K.R. No. 2. His relief and line remained for some 
years unpaid; see succeeding rolls. Excerpta e Rot. Fin. p. 38. 

^ Mr. Farrer calls him son of Adam, but cites no authority {Lane. Fines, 
p. 188 n). 

* Compare his charter in the Coucher Book of Whalley Abbey, p. 67, pur- 
porting to grant land in Westhalghton. One of the witnesses is Thomas de 

^ Assize Roll No. 404, mm. i, 7. 


Grillee, to which he is also a witness. Elias, his son and heir, 
to whom (probably at his marriage) he conveyed Whickles- 
wick, died before him, as we shall presently see. But it will 
be necessary at this point to have recourse to information 
supplied by the assize rolls. 

From these we learn that in 1278 one Adam de Pennesbyry 
recovered the manor of Pennesbyry (except Drailesden, the 
Milneriding, and a moiety of the mill on Irwell) from Roger 
de Pennesbyry and Amabel widow of Elias son of Roger de 
Pennesbyry upon a writ of novel disseisin.^ Amabel vouches 
Roger, her co-defendant, to warrant the dower he had assigned 
her. Roger pleads that the plaintiff never was so seised that 
disseisin was possible ; but unfortunately for us neither party 
in counting further develops his pedigree. In 1284 Maud, 
the daughter and heir of Elias, recovered from Roger de 
Penulbury a messuage and land and the moiety of a mill in 
Barton, held by Alice daughter of William de Eccles, upon a 
writ of mort dancestre^ Roger being the vouchee.^ In 129 1, 
upon a writ of novel disseisin, William de Penilbyri sues 
Adam de Pilkington and others for a messuage and one 
carucate of land in Barton, which we may take it means 
Whickleswick. It appears that Elias died thereof seised, 
Maud being his daughter and heir ; and Pilkington's defence 
is that he is entitled to an estate for life by the courtesy of 
England, for Maud was his wife and bore him a daughter 
Cecily. Plaintiff's case however is that Maud's only daughter 
was stillborn, and he is her uncle and heir. The jury find 
that the said daughter was born at daybreak, being so weak 
that her life was despaired of, and so incontinently died ; that 
the matrons present, seeing her condition, then and there in 
the chamber baptized her by the name Cecily, and after 
baptism she lived per spatium itineris duarum leucarum ; but 
was never heard within the four walls.^ Upon this special 
verdict judgment was reserved ; and about the same time, as we 
have seen, both parties concurred in the sale of Whickleswick 
to Adam de Prestwich. Not long afterwards Beatrice daughter 
of Elias de Penulbury is found conveying to him the manor 
of Pendlebury also. 

Now these facts are not easy to reconcile. It is clear that 
Roger de Penulbury was living in 1284, survived Elias 

^ Assize Roll 1238, m. ^id. ^ Ibid. 1265, m. 2id. 

^ Ibid. 1294, m. %d. 



his eldest son : that EHas left a daughter Maud, called his heir, 
who took under the grant of Whickleswick made by her grand- 
father : and that after her death William, as the eldest surviving 
son of Roger, was her heir. Who then were Adam and 
Beatrice, and whence was their title derived ? Was Adam the 
rightful representative of the family whom Roger had kept 
out of his inheritance for a generation ? Was he a son to 
whom Roger had conveyed the property during his own life- 
time ? Or was he merely a feffoee, and the action a friendly 
one for the purpose of barring an entail ? Again, how was it 
that Beatrice did not share the inheritance of Maud ? Had 
Elias left a son, we might suppose Beatrice to be the daughter 
of a second marriage, excluded by the doctrine of the half 
blood ; and possibly that is the true explanation. But another 
Elias de Penulbury was killed in 1292 in a quarrel with one 
Richard de Bradbury on the road from Manchester,^ and he 
may have been her father, and perhaps son and heir to the 
mysterious Adam, or even to William. The difficulty remains 
that, if Adam were heir male of the family after the death of 
the first Elias, and if Beatrice were his heir at law, she (and not 
William the uncle) would be heir also of Maud.^ 

Fresh difficulties confront us in the Prestwich pedigree, 
and it is worth an effi^rt to dispose of some of them, though 
from this point the descent of Whickleswick is clear enough. 
Robert de Prestwich occurs first in the Pipe Roll of 1 193-4 as 
implicated in John's rebellion, and again in subsequent rolls. 
He died about the year 1205-6, when Adam his son fined 
five marks for his father's lands. ^ Adam is the tenant in 12 10, 
holding ten bovates in Prestwych and Faileswrthe in chief in 
thanage, with Adam de Heton (four bovates, presumably 
Heaton) and Gilbert de Notton (two bovates in Faileswrthe) 
as his undertenants ; also four bovates in Alkinton of ancient 

^ Assize Roll 409, m. 5 . 

2 To complicate matters still further, the editor of the Lancashire Fines 
states (p. 188 that in 1282 * Alice de Prestwich is returned as rendering 
\os. yearly for Pendlebury,' and assumes that she was heiress of the family. 
That she clearly was not, as appears by the foregoing narrative ; and if the fact 
was as stated, I can only suppose that the was either widow of Adam or 
guardian of his heir. We shall however find that a lady of that name did hold 
the manor later, by a title that we can account for ; and possibly there has been 
some mistake about the date. In Baines' Lancashire^ iii. 136, the date given 
is 10 Edward II. 

^ Lane. Pipe Rolls. Excerptat e Rot. Fin. 



Pedigree of Penulbury : 


Elias son of Robert, 
alias de Penulbury, 
before 1 1 8 2, bailiff of 
Salford, dead 1218 

Adam de Penulbury, 
son and heir, 121 8, 
bailiff of Salford, 
living 1226 

^ Adam de Penulbury 
recovered Pendlebury 
from Roger 1278 

? Elias de Pendlebury 
killed 1292 

? Beatrice dau. oj Elias 

Roger de Penulbury : 
occ. 1246 to 1284, 
dead 1291 

Elias de Penulbury 
son and heir, ob. 
v.p. before 1278 


William de Penulbury, 
uncle and heir to Maud 
1291, occurs 1302 

Maud dau. and 
heir 1284, mar- 
ried Adam de 
dead 1291, 
s.p. s. 

? Beatrice dau. of 
Elias de Penulbury^ 
of age 1298, con- 
•veyed Pendlebury 
by fine 1 300, 
Having 1 33 1 




tenure, under Roger de Montbegon. ^ Between this Adam and 
the later Adam who acquired Whickleswick and Pendlebury 
we have nothing but the name of Thomas de Prestwich, oc- 
curring in the assize roll of 1246, and as witness to several 
undated charters, though the interval of time seems rather to 
require two intervening generations. 

The younger Adam witnesses a number of Barton deeds, 
after the death of Sir Gilbert de Barton. He occurs in the 
assize roll of 1277, and at subsequent dates down to 13 13. 
In the de Lacy inquisition of 131 1 (4 Edward II. No. 51) he 
appears as tenant of the manor of Alkrington, one-fourth part 
of a knight's fee. The various documents relating to his 
purchase of Whickleswick have been already noticed. That 
manor he settled upon his son Henry by a deed thus abstracted 
in the Breviat : — 

A° 29 Ed. I. Adam of Prestwyche gave the Man'' of Quickleswick in 
tail to Henry of Prestwych his sonn & the heires of his body, with remaind*" ou*" 
to each of his daugters one after another & to the heirs of their bodyes 
severallie, the Reversion to himself & his heyrs. 

For further assurance a fine was levied in Michaelmas term 
1 301 (29 Edward I.), between Henry de Trafford plaintiff and 
Adam de Prestwych deforciant, of one messuage 80 acres of 
land, 6 of meadow, 10 of wood, and 100 of pasture in Barton, 
by virtue of which Adam became tenant for life, with remainder 
to his son, here called ' Henry son of Agnes de Trafford,' and 
the heirs of his body, and successive remainders over to 
Margaret, Ellen, Margery and Joan, sisters of Henry, as in the 
Breviat.^ Henry de Prestwich, or de Quickeleswyke as he is 
sometimes named, had a quitclaim from Beatrice de Penulbury 
in 133I5 and in 1346 joined with John de Trafford of New- 
croft and Henry his son in a bond to Gilbert de Haydok.^ 
His heir was a daughter, Katherine, who married John de Bolde. 

Henry de Prestwich however was not his father's heir. 
According to several Lancashire genealogists, Prestwich and the 

^ Knights Fees i. 

^ When the editor of Lancashire Fines suggests (p. 196 ».), on the strength 
of this fine, that Agnes held Whickleswick in her own right, he has evidently 
overlooked the evidence of the fine a year earlier (p. 188). That the sugges- 
tion is erroneous will appear sufficiently from the foregoing narrative. A later 
Henry de Trafford (son of Robert), from whom the TrafFords of Garrett are 
commonly but erroneously derived, is usually described in records as of 
Prestwich, from 1350 onwards. 

^ Evidences of Legh of Lyme ; Raines MSS. vol. xxxviii. f. 45. 


bulk of Adam's property descended to a certain Alice de 
Wolveley, whom they supposed to be his only daughter by a 
former marriage, and heir of entail. Such devolution is not 
uncommon at that period. Sir Gilbert de Barton, for instance, 
had a 'daughter and heir,' Agnes, by his first wife, whose 
daughter Loretta (it is believed) carried Barton to the Booths ; 
but he also left a ' son and heir,' John, by a second wife, and 
other sons besides. Alice held her estate by virtue of two 
fines of later date, not yet printed, and these reveal her true 
paternity. The first was levied in Michaelmas term 5 
Edward II. (131 1) between Alice daughter of Richard de 
Pontefract and Adam de Prestwych, and by this the manor 
of Penulbury and certain tenements in Prestwych were settled 
upon Alice for life, to be held of Adam at a rose rent, remainder 
to Robert her son and the heirs of his body, remainder to 
Alice his sister similarly, remainder to Agnes another sister 
similarly, remainder to Adam. By the second, levied in 
Michaelmas term 7 Edward II. (13 13) between Adam de 
Prestewych and Thomas de Wolveley, the manors ofPrestewych, 
Alkerington and Pennilbury, and the advowson of Prestewych 
were settled upon Adam for life, remainder to Alice de 
Wolveley for life, remainder to Thomas her son and the heirs 
of his body, remainder to Robert his brother similarly, re- 
mainder successively to Alice and Agnes their sisters similarly, 
remainder to Roger de Prestewych. To this last fine Alice 
sister of John de Biroun and John son of John de Prestewych, 
Adam de Worlegh and Emma his wife, John and Thomas sons 
of Emma, all appose their claims. 

In consequence of these fines, Mr. Farrer has put forward 
a different pedigree : — ^ 

i. ii. 
.... — Adam de Prestwich = Agnes de Trafford 

1 1 

Richard de Pontefract = A/ice Henry 

I etc. 
. . , . de — Alice dau. and heir 
Wolveley | 

I I i I 

Thomas de Wolveley Robert Alice Agnes 


^ Lane. Fines, ig6 n. I have had to dissent from several of Mr. Farrer's 
conclusions ; but it would be ungracious not to acknowledge the great assist- 
ance derived from the texts which he has printed. 


But in regard to this I would observe, first, that he gives 
no evidence for his assumption that de Pontefract had a wife, 
and Alice de Wolveley a mother of that name. Further, that 
Alice takes only an estate for life, with no remainder over to 
her heirs, and the entail is on her children, to whom the name 
Wolveley is never attached ; also that in the former fine neither 
the name Wolveley nor any husband of Alice is mentioned, 
nor does any husband of hers take a life interest under either 
fine. Again, when she succeeds to her estate for life it is as 
Alice de Prestwich ; and in that name she is returned as tenant 
of Penhulbury, Prestwych and Heton, Alryngton, and pro- 
perty called le Brendlach in a survey of about the year 1322^ 
while later it is Thomas de Preslewycbe^ whose widow is sued 
for lands in Prestwich in 1356.^ Moreover it would seem 
that Adam had sons by his first wife ; for we find a John 
son of Adam de Prestwiche witnessing a Barton charter of 2 
Edward II., father perhaps of the John whose claim is apposed 
five years later. Finally, to leave no manner of doubt, another 
survey, purporting to be of 23 Edward III., calls the tenant of 
Akkery ngton Alicia que fuit uxor Ade de Prestwyche. ^ 

We may therefore safely infer, in my opinion, that Alice de 
Pontefract was the widow of Adam's son and heir apparent, 
who died before 131 1, in his father's lifetime, leaving the two 
sons and two daughters already named ; that Adam was her 
husband's name as well as his father's ; that between 1 3 1 1 and 
13 13 she married a second husband, the Thomas de Wolveley 
of the fine ; and that Thomas son of Adam de Prestewych, 
who, with John son of Roger de Prestwych and others, was 
indicted for a game trespass at Manchester in 1329,* was their 
son and heir, and the person on whom Prestwich was settled 
by the fine of 13 13. Roger de Prestwich, next in remainder 
after the children of Alice, was very probably the second 
son, and the John above mentioned (whose son was left 

^ Lansdowne MS. 559, fF. 5 3, 6, 6b, where Thomas Earl of Lancaster is 
referred to as dead : * Birch Feodary ' (first part). 
^ Assize Roll, Due. Lane. No. 5. 

^ Lansdowne MS. 559, f. 23. In making use of these surveys, great 
caution is necessary, where the original has not been traced. This MS., for 
example, dates from the latter half of the fourteenth century, but (like the 
Testa de Nevill) is a compilation from earlier documents ; and the copyist does 
not always clearly distinguish the component parts. 

* Coram Rege Roll, 3 Edw. IIL Easter, m. i\d. 



Suggested Pedigree of Prestwich : 

Robert de Prestwich 
1 194 ; died circa 1 205 

Adam de Prestwich, son 
and heir 1206, 1210 

Thomas de Prestwich, 1246 

1. ii. 

Adam de Prestwich 1277, 1313 = Agnes de Trafford 


Adam de = Alice dau.= Thomas ? Roger ?John Henry de Prest- 

son & heir 
app. dead 

of Richard \ deWolveley 
de Ponte- • 13 13 
fract : 

? Thomasy ancestor of Tonge 

wich alias de 


I. Thomas de Prestwich = Alice 2. Robert Alice m. Agnes 
1329* I333> dead 1353 I 1356 s.p. Jordan de s.p. 


dau. and heir 
m. John de 


? Agnes 

Richard de Longeley = Joan dau. and heir 1356, 
1356, dead 1374 I 'dead 1374 

Roger de Longeley = 
son and heir, a minor | 
1374, died 1394 


Robert de Longeley 
son and heir, aged 15 
in 1394 


Langley of Agecroft 



out of the entail) a younger son of Adam by his first 
marriage/ p--- 
The subsequent history of the Prestwich estates, derived 
from various records, may be shortly summarized. Robert de 
Prestwich succeeded to the property settled upon him, but died 
without issue, and so did his sister Agnes. As to Thomas, 
the evidence is conflicting. He survived Robert, and died 
before 1353, leaving a widow ; but while some accounts say 
he left no issue, others state that he had two daughters, 
Margaret and Agnes, who were both childless.^ The issue of 
the younger Alice thus became sole representatives of the 
elder branch of the family. She had married Jordan de 
Tetlow, son and heir of Adam, and had by him a daughter 
Joan, their heir.^ Joan married Richard de Longeley, and 
from that marriage sprang the Langleys who, inheriting 
Pendlebury, seated themselves at Agecroft Hall, where a black 
and white mansion still remains, among sadly incongruous 
surroundings, a fine example of the domestic architecture of its 
period, and a lasting testimony at once to the good taste and 
the importance of the builders. Besides Pendlebury the 
Langleys held Prestwich, Alcrington, and Tetlow, all of them 
the inheritance of Joan de Tetlow. * 

^ From a Thomas son of Alice de Wolveley the family of Tonge claim to 
descend. There is abundant proof that the Thomas already spoken of left no 
legitimate male issue ; and most probably this Thomas was a son by her second 

^ Again one account is that Margaret in 1360 took the veil at Seton, 
another that she married Robert de Holand. Chetham Soc. xcv. ; Townley^s 
Abstracts, pp. 50 sqq. 

^ Sons named Thurstan and Robert died in infancy {Tozvnley^s Abstracts, I.e.). 

* See Assize Roll, Due. Lane. No. 5 (The Duke v. RadclifFe and Prestwich ; 
Henry son of Henry son of Thomas p. same ; RadclifFe z>. Longlegh and 
others) ; Assize Roll 438, m. /\.d (Archd. of Richmond and Longley v. Tettelowe 
and others). In this suit a question is raised as to Joan's legitimacy ; but it is 
shown to have been certified in another action by the bishop (see also the 
verdict of a jury on the point, Assize Roll, Due. Lane. No. 2). By a singular 
coincidence, Jordan de Tettelowe was also heir apparent, and died in his father's 
lifetime, without male issue. The feoffment to younger sons made by his 
father illustrates what I believe to have taken place in the family ofPenulbury. 
See also for the Tettelowes Assize Roll 1464, m. 32^. ; and for the descent of 
Prestwich, Rex v. Longley, on a quare impedit, Palat. Lane. Plea Roll, No. i , 
m. 15 (13), and Townlefs Abstracts, cited above. The old thanage tenure of 
Prestwich had, in the Langleys' time, been transformed in some mysterious 
way into knight service. 


But it is time to return to Whickleswick, where we are 
soon to be involved in trouble of another kind. And first I 
would refer to a record of 1440 — the Close Roll of the 
Palatinate, No. 3 (56) — in which the descent of the manor is 
traced from Adam de Prestwich to Agnes Massey, as in the 
pedigree printed above, but for the omission of Bolde's 
surname. The TrafFord evidences however, and the Breviat, 
tell the story more in detail. The latter continues : — 

A° 4 Hen. IV. Geffrey Boulde was attainted at the Battle of Shrewsbury. 
This Geffrey was Son and heyr of the Body of Catherin, who was doghter and 
heire of the Body of Henry of Prestewiche. 

John Bolde was no doubt a cadet of the well known 
family of that name in the adjoining Hundred of West 
Derby. For his father's name I have only the authority of 
the pedigree. In 1357 John de Bolde and Katerine his wife 
were, with others, indicted for a conspiracy to seize Joan 
Langton, and he is styled of Whikleswyk upon the same roll. ^ 
Next year Thomas de Gosenargh is suing RadclilFe of Ordsal, 
Sir Henry de TrafFord, John de Bolde of Whikleswyk and 
his wife for a rent in Ordsal. ^ A year later they are parties 
to a fine at Preston,^ with Sir Henry de Trafford plaintiff* 
assuring to the latter for life, at a rose rent, fourscore acres of 
land and four of meadow in Barton by Eccles. Here again 
the quantities leave little doubt that Whickleswick is 

Geoffrey their son had succeeded them by Michaelmas 
1388 or 1389, when he makes a grant and quitclaim of his 
manor of Quycleswyk in the town of Barton to Henry de 
Trafford the younger.* This was, I suppose, a feoffment to 
uses, but we have not the reconveyance ; and when trouble 
had ensued after the rebellion, advantage seems to have been 
taken of Trafford's interest in attempting to recover the 
property from the Crown. The Breviat proceeds : — 

A° 5 Hen. IV. It was enacted that none of the Traytors that weare 
against the kinge in that Battaill should forfeyt any lande wherof they were 
enfeoffed to the use of others, or to perform the will of such as Trusted them, 

^ Assize Roll 437, m. 11, i\d. 2 Ydidc. ^^S,m. 18. 

^ Monday after St. James Ap. 9 Duke Henry (Case 3, No. 69). 

* In Canon Raines' rMS. the grant is dated Monday [before] Michaelmas 
13 Richard II., the quitclaim Friday after Michaelmas 12 Richard II,, but 
the witnesses are the same in both. I have no doubt one date or the other 
is wrong. 



but only such as came unto them by descent of inh'tance, or by their own 

By thatteynd' of Geffrey Boulde and by the colo"" of y® s^ Acte, the saide 
Man' of Quickleswyk was seized into the kings hands, and after granted to s 
Geffrey by I'res patentes for terme of his lyfe, the Reversion to the King and 
his heirs. 

By Reason hereof after the death of s** Geffrey the Manor reverted to 
King Henry the v^*^, who died thereof seized, and from him it descended to 
King Henry the vj*. 

The next deed is somewhat mysterious. It is a grant by 
Sir Edmund de Trafford to Thomas son of John de Stanley, 
knight, and Thomas Spencer, vicar of Boudon, of his manor 
of Whikleswyk, and is dated Monday after St. Andrew, 5 
Henry VI. The original seems to have borne a fine heraldic 
seal of Trafford's. Whether his claim was made in his own 
interest or in that of the Boldes does not appear ; but it was 
based presumably upon the conveyance just mentioned, for a 
few months later the latter is revived in one of those quaint 
declarations then in vogue : — 

For als myche as hit is a dede of charite in iche maf^ to record a sothe, 
knowen be hit to all men y" Wee John of Assheton S" Rauf of Longton 
Rauf of Longford S*" Rauf of Radclyf knyghtes and John of Radclyf of Ordsale 
Esquier Weren p'^sent att Mamcestr' y^ Tyusday next after y® fest of y^ 
Inuenc'on of y^ holy crosse in y® yere of Henry y^ sext fyft And herden Rog"" 
Jonesson a trewe husbond A mon of sexty Wynt'^ and ten of age and moe 
Swere upon a Boke yatt he was p''sent when Geffrey of Bulde enfeoffet Henr' 
of Trafford y^ son of Henry of Trafford knyght in ye manor of Whicleswych 
to hym & to hys heires for eu''more be dede of fefment & yreopon delyv^ hym 
seisyn and putte out one Rog"^ of Entessyle y*^ yat tyme was tenant at wylle in 
y® same manor And also y® sayd S"^ John S Rauf [etc.] weren p'sente y® 
sayd daye yere and place when Thom' y^ PypLer] a mon of sexty Wynt^ and 
ten of age and more swere and on a boke yat he was p^sent at y® livere of 
seisyn yat aft' y^ feofment was made to y® sayd Henr' yat y® seyd Thom' mony 
yeres aft' yat gederet y® rent of y^ seyd Manor and payet hit to y® sayde 
Henry as to hym yat was lord of y® same Manor In y^ witnes of y queche 
thynge to yese p'sentz Pres Wee have sette our seals. Writen y® day yere and 
place abuf seyd [May 6, 1427]. 

A quitclaim from Stanley and Spencer to Trafford follows 
in about three weeks' time. 

Whatever the scheme may have been, evidently it was un- 
successful ; for in 1 1 Henry VI. Whickleswick was still in the 
Crown, and a lease for twenty-one years was granted to Roger 
Booth, at a yearly rent of 6s, %d, A few years more and 
Hugh Massy and his wife present a petition of right : — 


A° 18 Hen. VI. Hugh Massy and Agnes his wife, which Agnes was 
Dau'r and heir of the Body of Nicholas, who was Son and heir of the Body of 
the said Geffrey Boulde, which the Deed in tail made by Adam of Prestwyche to 
Henry his Sonn and the heyrs of his body, & laying down the descent in tail 
by s Agnes, and recyting all the meane proceed^^ as aboue named (except the 
grant of the custody), made humble suite to the kinge to consyder of their 
ryght and tytle & to do unto them in their behest as reason & law required, 
and thys for good cause & in the way of Charitee. 

Upon this follows, in November, a writ referring the 
petition to the Chancellor of England, and in May next year a 
writ to the Chancellor of the Duchy to make inquisition and 
certify the facts. Hereupon a commission issued, and an 
inquisition was taken at Manchester on the Friday after 
Michaelmas by a jury 'who found in all things as was 
conteyned in the s"^ petition.' Livery however was delayed, at 
the instance of the king's attorney, in order that search 
might be made for muniments in custody of the treasurer and 
chamberlain concerning the king's right to the manor ; and 
when none were found, the attorney pleaded denying the 
form of gift in the charter of Adam de Prestwich. This issue 
was tried before the king's Justices at Lancaster, at the next 
sessions, and a verdict being returned in the petitioner's 
favour, they obtained a judgment in Chancery ; and writs of 
livery issued from the Chancellor of England, on November 3, 
21 Henry VL (1442), and from the Chancellor of the Duchy 
on February 8. The sequel is amusing. Booth, being so 
discharged of the custody of the manor, ceased to pay his rent, 
and was sued by the Treasury for it. When he pleaded 
the judgment and livery made to Massy, exception was taken 
to his plea by the king's attorney, alleging that the manor of 
Whickleswyck, whereof the custody was granted him, and the 
manor of Quickleswicke in the town of Barton, were two 
distinct manors ; and this issue had to be tried in the 
Exchequer in Hilary Term 24 Henry VL before he was 
finally exonerated. ' All this,' says the Breviat, ' is proved by 
records and Decrees in Chancery and at Lancastre.' 

Hugh Massy, who thus became possessed of Whickleswick 
in right of his wife, has been usually identified with a certain 
Hugh de Mascy from whom the Masseys of Coddington are 
alleged (on very insufficient evidence) to descend.^ But the 
Hugh de Mascy in question appears on the scene in 12 and 
13 Richard II., and was thus the contemporary of Agnes' 

^ Ormerod, Cheshire {td. Helsby), ii. 731. 




grandfather. William Mascy, supposed to be his son, who 
purchased the manor of Coddington, was fifty years old in 1 1 
Henry VI. , seven years before the date of the petition of right. 
There is no possible point of later contact between the two 
pedigrees ; and while the Coddington family is still, I believe, 
represented in the male line, Whickleswick passed long ago 
to a female heir. About Hugh 1 have little to tell. The 
pedigree makes him a son of Geoffrey Massy, knight — that 
is, I suppose. Sir Geoffrey Massey of Tatton, who died without 
lawful issue in 1457, but had at any rate one natural son. 
According to another pedigree^ he was son of a Richard 
Massy ' of Whyteswick,' and grandson of Hamon Massy of 

Thomas Mascy of Whikelleswik, gentleman (grandson of 
Hugh), occurs in 1527 and 1533, in connection with articles 
for a marriage between Margaret his daughter and John Parr, 
son and heir apparent of Thurstan, and grandson of Hugh 
Parr of Cleworth, gentleman, and a receipt for her marriage 
portion. The will of his grandson, another Thomas Massey, 
who died in 1576, has been printed from Piccope's MS.^ 
This will, and an inquisition taken after his death, which 
traces his descent from Henry de Prestwich, supply the pedi- 
gree which I have here given. After his son's death there 
was again an inquisition, and a second some years later, upon 
information that Henry de Prestwich was son and heir ot 
Adam, and that the manor was held in chief ; when a jury 
found that Adam died at Barton seised of the reversion of 
Whickleswick, which descended to Henry de Prestwich as 
his son and heir ; that the manor was held of the queen by 
knight service as one tenth of a knight's fee, and that Adam 
held it of King Edward I. by the same service.^ It will be 
evident to my readers that this jury was singularly ill- 
informed. They also made a blunder in their pedigree, 
calling the third Thomas son, and not brother, of John 

Harl. Soc, Visitation of CheshirCy 1580. 
^ Lane. $if Ches. Wills, Chetham Soc. [n.s.] iii. 222. The executors were 
his father-in-law George Lawthorne, his brother-in-law Richard Hunt, and 
his wife : overseers *■ my Master ' John Radcliff esq., and Edmund RadclifF 
* my cosin.' 

^ Due. Lane. Inq. xii. 24 ; xv. 3 i ; xvii. 85. 



Massey of JVhickleswick 

Hugh Massey of Whickleswick — Agnes dau. and heir of Nicholas 
jure uxoris, 1440-z | Bolde 1440-2 

Nicholas Massey, son and heir = 

Thomas Massey of Whickleswick = 

son and heir, occurs 1527-33 I 

Thomas Massey of Whickleswick = Margaret m. John 

son and heir, buried at Eccles I buried at Eccles Parr c/rca 1 527 

John Massey = Dorothy, living 
of Whickles- a widow at 
wick, son and Elton, co. 
heir, s.p. Chester, 1 577, 


Thomas Massey — Katherine Margaret Anne Eleanor 

of Whickleswick, 
d. Dec. 13, 1576. 
Will. Inq. p.m. 

dau. of 
Lathom ?) 
living 1591 


1576 1576 

Thomas Massey of Whickleswick = Jane dau. of Thomas Dorothy Elizabeth Anne 

aged 9 in 1577, died Aug. 13, 1 590. 
Inq. p.m. 

Lancaster, esq., livmg 

Dorothy, posthumous dau. and heir, 
b. Dec. 1590, m, Thomas Leversage 5 
a widow 1632 ; sold Whickleswick 

In 1 60 1 (9 October, 43 Elizabeth) Edmund Gregory, 
Frodary, signs a receipt for 45., being one half year's rent 
of the lands late Thomas Masseyes, due to the Queen's 
Highness from William Leversage by reason of the wardship 
of his heir. The heir in question was his daughter Dorothy, 
who, as Dorothy Liversage of Whickleswiche widdow, by her 
deed of 23 April 1632, conveys the manor to Sir Cecil Traf- 
ford. The heading of the Breviat describes her as Dorothy 
Massy, heir general of Hugh Massy and Agnes his wife, and 
then wife to Thomas Leversage, gentleman, son and heir appar- 
ent of William Leversage of Northelech co. Chester,^ esquire. 

The property, of which the Traffords thus became pos- 
sessed in the seventeenth century, was (to quote the con- 
veyance) the manor of Whickles wicke alias Quickies wyk, a 
capital mansion house called Whickleswick Hall, and lands 

^ Northwich ? The Leversage family were in fact seated at Wheelock in 
that Hundred. Thomas and Dorothy had children who died apparently with- 
out issue. (Ormerod, iii. 1 19-21.) 



containing by estimation fourscore and eighteen acres, the 
field names being all given at length ; also a close of 3 acres in 
Ordsal called the Brookes, a messuage or cottage in 
Whickleswick with the boat and the water passage (i.e. ferry), 
a parcel of land lately improved from the moss (3 acres), three 
other messuages with land in Whickleswick, and threescore 
acres of waste bounding the said manor or mansion house on 
one side and adjoining Whickleswick Moss on the other. 
Sir Cecil's father had by his first marriage acquired the capital 
manor of Barton, of which, as we have seen (in spite of the 
erroneous finding to the contrary), Whickleswick was a mem- 
ber ; and settled it upon Sir Cecil, though he was the son of 
a second wife. 

From time immemorial the TrafFords had been parishioners 
of Manchester, and had their own chapel and place of burial 
in the Collegiate Church. In 1701 however Humphrey Traf- 
ford was married at Eccles, and his children, Humphrey, Cecil 
and Mary, were there baptized. That there maybe no doubt 
why that church was chosen, the last is called in the register 
daughter of 'Mr. Humphrey Trafford of Whigles wick.' Having 
married during his father's lifetime, he was perhaps the first 
of the family to reside there. In his son's time the Duke of 
Bridgewater's canals were made, and the old park in aU proba- 
bility cut up and spoilt. These canals were authorized by 
Acts of Parliament in 1758, 1759 and 1761. With the 
second edition (1769) of a pamphlet giving an account of 
their construction a map was published in which Whickleswick 
Hall is called Trafford House, and the moss Trafford Moss. 
Other maps twenty years later show that the waste land 
mentioned in the deed, between the hall and the moss, had 
then been converted into a park. 

Meanwhile, in 1779, a younger branch of the TrafFords, 
for four generations seated at Croston, had succeeded to the 
TrafFord estates ; and Whickleswick, under its new name, 
had become the permanent home of the family ; and so it re- 
mained until the ship canal, while impairing the amenities of 
the place, gave the land a new value. Docks and wharves 
now border what was the park ; and behind them are rising 
warehouses, engine shops, and all the adjuncts of a thriving 
modern port. But it must be left to future writers to relate 
the history of industrial Whickleswick. 

W. H. B. BIRD. 



France and England quarterly with a border of silver and 
azure gobony. [Beaufort] Le Cardynall de Engele- 


France and England quarterly. Roy Herrey the vj. 

Gules three sheaves gold with a border gold engrailed. 
[Kempe] Le Cardynall de Yorke. 

France and England quarterly with a label of Brittany [iij 
labelys of ermyne], Dewke de Claraunce. 

France and England quarterly, with a label of Brittany party 
with France. Dewke de Bedfforde. 

France and England quarterly with a border silver. Dewke 
de Glowsestre. 

England with une hordwre de Fraunce, Dewke de Excestyr. 




France and England quarterly the labelys of sylvyr [with] vj 
pelettys of gowlys. [Nine roundels are drawn.] Dewke de 


England with iij labelys of sylvyr, Dewke de Northfolke. 

France and England with a border {the armys of Dewke of 
Glowsestyr) quartering gold a cheveron gules {Stafford and 
the Erie of Herfforde all yn one). Dewke de Bokyng- 


France and England with a border of silver and azure gobony 
[Beaufort] impaled with Beauchamp and Newburgh 
quarterly. Duke of Somersett. 

Beauchamp and Newburgh quarterly impaled with Clare and 
Despenser quarterly. Duke of Warwyke. 

Silver three lions passant gules looking backward an armyd 
asewre the taylys comynge uppe bytwene the leges, Prynce 
OF Walys. [Sir Thomas Howe is scored out and 
Howell dda written in a later hand.] Set hym by nethe 
the olde baronys^ 

Gules a leopard gold an armyd wyth asewre, The armys of 

Azure a fesse and three leopards' heads gold [Pole] quartering 
silver a bend gules with three pairs of wings of silver 
[Wingfield]. Duke of Sofoke. 

^ This and other like remarks are doubtless notes made by the compiler 
for the arrangement of the arms in a later book. 


Sable three ostrich feathers of silver with penys of golde^ at the 
foot of each is a roll of gold with the word {jic Joff. Le 
hages deu Roye. 

Gold two griffons' legs rased sable lying barwise. Dewke de 
SoMERSETT [sic]. In a later hand is written Briak du 
Gyan armes, 

A heryth ente asewre a chef of gowles (that is to say — parted 
gules and azure cheveronwise) with two leopards rampant 
gold armed with azure in the chief and a fleur-de-lys 
gold in the foot. The Bastarde of Claraunce. 

Gules a lion gold [Fitz Alan] quartered with sable a frete 
gold [Maltravers]. Count de Arrondell. 

Gules a fesse gold between six crosslets [gold] [Beauchamp] 
quartered with gold and aseure ceche [sic] a cheveron oj 
ermyne [Newburgh]. Count de Warrewyke. 

Gold a lion azure, quartered with gules iij leweys of silver. 
Count de Northumberlond. 

Gules a saltire silver. Count de Westemerlond. 

Gold three roundels gules [Courtenay] quartered with gold 
a lion azure [Reviers]. Count de Dowenechyre. 

Quarterly gules and gold with a pierced molet silver in the ^-a 
quarter. Count de Oxynfford. 

In the first quarter and the fourth — a lion with a border 
engrailed, quartered with two lions passant. In the 
second and third quarters — a bend between six martlets, 
quartered with a fret. Over all an escutcheon with a 
fesse between six crosslets. Count de Schrowysbery. 

A fesse indented of three fusils for Montague quartered with 
gold an eagle [vert] for Monthermer — the whole 



quartering gules a saltire silver with a label goboiiy for 

Nevill. Count de Salysbery. Below the shield is 

written Salysbery by fore chef. 
Gold a chief indented azure. Count de Urmounde. 
Gold a chief indented azure with a label argent,^ Count de 

Wylchyre. Botteler Sir Jamys. 
Silver a saltire gules engrailed. Below this shield is written 

§v.artly the armys of Salesbery. Count de Worcestyr. 


Azure a lion gold with the field powdered with golden fleurs 
de lys [Beaumont] quartered with azure three ivhet 
chewys or garbys of gold [Comyn]. Le Wyscount de 
Beau MO ND. 

Gules a sleeve of gold. The olde Kynge of Man. [This is 
struck out and Lorde Hastynges is written below in a 
later hand.] 

Silver a bend sable, quartered with gules a fret gold [so 

drawn]. Lord Spenser. 
Gules three bozvo-\s silver. Lord Roos. 

Dor a lion gules within a border of gules engrailed [Talbot, 
the colours have been reversed], quartering gules two 
lions passant [a'rge?it in a later hand] [Strange]. Lord 

Ermine a cheveron gules, quartering gules a fret gold. Thys 

quarter before chefe. Lord of Awdeley. 
Barry silver and azure with three roundels in the chief, 

quartered with Hastings quartering Valence. Lord 

Gray-Cod NO RE. 
Gold and gules oz^cnde ofvj pecys [Lovell] quartered with azure 

a lebarde rampant silver in a field powdered with fleurs de 

lys of silver [Holand]. Lord Lowell. 
Gowlys a lyon of syhyr the field powdered with crosse croslettis 

pycche of the best [that is to say — of the colour of the 

beast]. [La Warr] quartered with azure three fleurs de 

lys out of leopards heads gold [Cantelow]. Lord de 


^ I: has been pointed out elsewhere that cr and crgent were not used hj 
the custom of the middle ages in English blazoning. An example here and 
there of the French form being used will occur in cases such as the above, 
where the artist, making his sketch in all probability- from a roll of arms 
written in French, lets a French word slip into his English blazon. It 
will be noticed that the title of the Earl of Wiltshire, the bearer of the coat, is 
itself set do\^Ti in the French. 


Gold a fesse between two cheverons gules. Lord Fewater 

Sable a cross engrailed gold [Willoughby] quartered with 

gules a millrind cross silver [Bek], Lord Wylby. 
Golde and asewre cbeccbe with a fesse gules. Lord Clyf- 


Gules seven voided losengys of gold. Lord Ferreres of 

Gold a lion sable armyd gowlys with a forked tail. Lord 
OF Wellys. 

Gules six caloppys of silver. Lord Calys [Scales]. 
ne felde gowlys hesaunte of golde with an ermine quarter. 
Lord Sowch. 

Silver 2igryffon of goulys armyd aseure bek and [Botreaux] 

quartered with barry silver and gules with three roundels 

of gu)es in the chief. Lord Botrewse. 
Gules a cheveron silver between ten crosses formy of silver. 

Lord Berkeley. 
Ermine a lion gules with a crowne of golde within a border 

sable engrailed hesaunte of golde. Lord Fanhope. 
Silver a cross gules engrailed between four bosches of sabyll 

[Bourchier]. a note in the margin adds lordbemond 

le wyscount a fore baronys. Lord Bowcer. 
Silver a saltire engrailed gules. Lord Typttofte. 
Barry silver and sable with three roundels sable in the chief. 

Lord Hungerforde. 
Gules two lions passant silver armyd aseure. Lord 


Silver a chief azure and a bend or baston gules [Cromwell] 
quartered with checkered gold and gules a chief ermine 
[Tatershall]. Lord Cromewell. 

Barry gold and vert with a baston gules [Poynings] quar- 
tering goulys iij lyonys of sylvre passant a bend of aseu? 
[FiTz Payne]. Lord Ponynges. 

Silver a lion sable with a crown of gold. Lord Morlay. 

Gold two lions passant azure [Somery] quartered with silver 
a cross paty azure [Sutton]. Lord Doddley. 

Silver a chief azure with two pierced molets gold [Clinton] 
quartered with quarterly gold and gules [Say]. Lord 

Gold a lion gules armyd asewre the tayle forche. Lord 




Paly wavy of gold and gules [Molines, a Mauduit coat] quar- 
tered with barry sable and silver with three plates in the 
chief [Hungerford]. The colours of this last coat are 
muddled in the trick, which is probably meant for the 
more familiar coat of Hungerford with the two bars and 
three plates in the chief. Lord Molaynys. 

Gold two bends gules [Sudeley] quartered with gules a fesse 
checkered argent and sahyll between six crosslets formy 
fitchy gold [Boteler]. Lord Swdeley. 

Barry silver and azure with a label gules. Lord Graye of 

Fretty a chief [Fitz Hugh]. This coat is an error for the 

three braced cheverons with a chief, the usual coat 

assigned to Fitz Hugh. Here it is impaling vair a fesse 

gules for Marmion. Lord Fehewe. 
Barry silver and azure with three roundels gules in the chief. 

Lord Gray Rether[feld]. 
Azure iij sysefoylys syhyr the field powdered with crosse crosselettys 

of the sayne [Darcy]. Lord Darchy. 
Aseure a hende of gold e [Lord Scrope] quartered with silver a 

saltire gules engrailed Lord [Typtofte]. Lord Crope 

of Bolton. 

Gules iij caloppys of syhyr [Dacre] quartered with golde and 
gowlys checche [Vaux of Gillesland]. Lord of 

Azure a bend gold with a label silver. Lord Scrope of 

Barry silver and azure of eight pieces with iij chaplettys of 
goulys yn every chapelet v rose the bouddys w*yn golde. The 
Baron of Graystoke. 

Gold a chief gules with three roundels silver [Camoys]. Lord 

Gules a fesse gold between six crosslets gold with a crescent 
sable on the fesse, quartly Westmerland gules a saltire 
of silver [Nevill]. Lord of Bargewenne. 

Sable fretty silver. Lord Heryngeton. 

Gules a saltire silver [Nevill] quartered with gules a cross 
paty gold [Latimer], impaled with Beauchamp quartering 
with Newburgh. Lord Latemer. 

Goulys a lyon passaunt of syhyr crownyd golde [Lisle] quar- 
tered with silver a cheveron gules [Tyes]. Lord 


Silver a lion azure armyd wt gowlys [Fauconberge] quar- 
tered with gules a saltire silver [Nevill]. Lord 

Golde and gowlys werre. Lord Ferreres of Chartley, 

Gules a fesse gold between six martlets gold. Lord Beau- 
CHAMPE. S^ John Beach ampe of Powyk. 

Gules a cheveron gold with three lyonsewse of sahyll on the 
cheveron. Lord Cobbham. 

Sable a bend gold between six fountains silver [sic] Lord 

Gold a cross sable [Aton] quartered with sable a bend flowery 
gold [Bromflete]. Lord Wessey. 

Gold fretty sable and a chief sable with three bezants thereon 
[St. Amand] quartered with gules a fesse between six 
martlets dore [Beauchampe]. Lord Seynt Amonde. 
S^ Wylyam Beauchampe. 

Quarterly ermine and gules indented [Fitz Warine] quar- 
tered with silver a cross gules engrailed between four 
bougets sable [Bourchier]. Lord Fewarreyne [the 
PRYORE }\ S^ Wylyam Bourcer. 

An empty shield at the foot of the page. Lord of Seynt 

Northumbyrland armys dyfference. A lion with a fleur de lys 

on the shoulder [Percy] quartering three luces [Lucy], 

Lord Egremoyne. 
Barry gules and argent with a quarter of gules and an eagle of 

gold on the quarter. Lord Rewers. 
Sable seven pierced molets silver. Lord Bonwyle. 
Quarterly gold and gules — a marginal note adds — a bordwre of 

sylvyr [Say] quartered with Azure three lions golds 

[FiENNEs]. Lord Saye. 
Gold three lions passant sable. The Baron of Carrew. 
Silver two bars of azure. The Baron of Hylton. 
Gules a pierced cinqfoil gold, with six croslettys gold hottone 

around it. Sir Gylberd Umferwyle of Northumber- 


Silver a fesse gules between three crescents gules [Ogle] 
quartering gold a voided escutcheon azure [Bertram]. 
Sir Robarde of Ogle of Northumberlond. 

Silver a fesse gules between three popyngayes of grene beke and 
fet gowlys. Sir Thomas Lwmley. 


Quarterly gold and gules with a bend sable and three caloppys 
of sylvyr on the bend. Sir Wylyam Ewerys of the 
hyschepryke of Derham. 

Ermine three bent bows of gules. Sir Wylyam Bowys of the 
hyscheperyke of 'Derham, 

Gules a saltire silver charged with a rose. [Sir James 
Strangways struck out] Nevell. 

Gules a lion silver with a border engrailed silver. Sir 
RoBARDE Knollys of North humherland. 

Silver three cups of sable, the field crusilly fitchy. The arms 
would appear to take the place of an engrailed saltire 
originally drawn. Sir John Sorteys of North umher- 

Azure a sleeve of gold. Sir John Coynyerys of Torkechyre, 


Silver a bend sable with three crescents of silver. Sir 
Wylyam Elmedene of the byschoperyke of Derham. 

Gules a fesse silver between iij orchonys of silver. Sir 
RoBARD Claxton of the hyschiperyke of Derham, 

Gules three heronys of sylvyr^ heke and fet golde. Sir Emonde 
Heron of North humberlond. 

Barry gold and azure [vij pecys is written in the margin]. Sir 
John Constabyll. Tork chyre. 

Sable two lions passant gohhone sylvyr and gowlys. Sir Jamys 
Strangways. Torke chyre. 

Gules a cross paty gold with five pierced molets of gules 
[Oughtred] quartered with azure crusilly gold with iij 
bordonys of gold [Burdon]. Sir Robarde Owthreyght. 
Torke chyre. 

Quarterly azure and silver with a fleur de lys gold in the 
quarter. Sir Tomas Metham. Torke chyre. 

Gules a cheveron silver with three roses gules. Sir Robarde 

K NOLLYS. Torke chyre. 
Ermine a lion azure with a golden crown. Sir Jamys Pyke- 

RiNGE. Torke chyre. 

Silver a chief sable with two pierced molets of gold. Sir 
John Salwayne. Torke chyre. 

Ermine three bars gules and three crescents sable. Sir 
Robarde Waterton. Torke chyre. 

Azure a cross paty silver voided. Sir John of Melton. Torke 



- — ' ' 

Gold a voided escutcheon of azure. Sir John Bartram. 

Silver a bend sable engrailed with three owls of silver [Savile] 
quartered with goulys a chef of sy Ivy r iiij gymelys of the same 
[Thornhill]. Sir John Saywyle. Torke chyre. 

Silver a fesse gules with cotises of gules with three fleurs 
de lys silver on the fesse. Sir Wylyam Normanwyee. 
Torke chyre. 

Gules a cheveron ermine between three lions gold [a Langton 

coat]. Sir John Percehaye. Torkechyre. The shield 
has been struck through with a pen. 

Sable a bend gold between six escallops gold. Sir Alys- 
aundyr Folgham. Derby chyre. 

Azure a fesse indented gold. Sir Harry Percy. Torke 
chyre, The olde armys. 


Silver two bends sable engrailed. Sir Rawfe Radclyff of 
Lancaster chyre. 

Gules a fesse silver between iij popyngays of silver. Sir 
Wylyam Lumley of the byschopperyke of Derham. 

Gules three bougets ermine. Sir Robard Roos of Mydherst 
of Sowsex. 

Silver a cheveron gules between three lions* heads gules rased. 

GoY OF RocLYFF. Tork chyre. 
Gules three bars silver with three pierced molets of silver in 

the chief. Tomas Weschyngton of y^ byschopperyke of 


Ermine a fesse gules. Wylyam Romonby. Torke chyre. 
Gold a lion's leg sable the shoulder issuing from the sinister 

side, party with sable a fesse gold. [Sir Tomas of 

Stanley. Lancaster chyre struck out.] 
Silver a bend argent [.^^for 9,zur6] with cotises of azure and 

three griffons gold passant on the bend. Tomas Gra. 

Yorke chyre, 

Atmyq^ iij whetchevys of sylvyr, Mayster John Mawrschall. 
Tork chyre* 

Sable a fesse silver with iij crosse croslettys bottone of sabyll, 

John of Newsam. Torke chyre. 
Azure three crescents gold [Ryther] quartered with a lion. 

Sir Wylyam of Ryther of Torkechyre, 
Silver a fesse gules indented. Sir Tomas Bassewell of Tork 


Silver a fesse sable between six crosslets fitchy sable. John 
Catton. Derham chyre. 



Gold three dragons' heads azure rased with tongues gules. 
Sir Gilberd Halsale. [Lancaster in a later handJ] 

Silver three bends gules [Byron]. Sir John Berron of Lan- 
caster cbyre. 

Gold a cross sable with five crescents silver [Ellis] quartered 
with gules a lion werre syhyr and aseure [Everingham]. 
RoBARDE Elys. Tork chyre. 

Silver a fesse sable flowery above and below. Sir John 
Dawell of Tork chyre. 

Sable three escallops silver. Wylyam Strykelond. 

Ermine a fesse gules with three golden rings thereon [Barton] 
quartered with paly argent and wert. Rychard of 
Barton of Lancaster chyre. 

Gold a chief azure indented with three roundels silver 
[Lathom] quartering silver a bend azure with three 
harts' heads gold [Stanley]. Sir Tomas of Stanley. 
Lancaster chyre. 

Sable a fesse silver between iij pellycanys of syhyr wounding 
themselves. Wylyam Pellesan. Torke chyre. 

Silver two bars gules and a quarter gules with a pierced cinq- 
foil of gold on the quarter. Wylyam Preston of Lan- 
caster chyre. 

Sable a fesse gules between three escallops silver [sic], 
Wylyam Laton. 

Gules three picks gold. Sir John Pygot. 


Paly silver and gules and a chief azure with a leopard gold. 

Sir John Langford. 
Azure a cheveron silver between three leaping hounds of 

silver. Tomas Gower. 
Silver a saltire gules with five crosses paty sable. Tomas 


Gules a fesse silver between three lambs. Sir Tomas 

Silver three bears' heads sable rased with moselys of goulys. 

Tomas Berrewyk. 
Paly silver and azure with a bend gules. Sir Hewe of 


Gules a cheveron ermine between three lions gold. The lions 
in chief face one another after the common practice at 
this time when lions are depicted above a cheveron. 
Sir John of Langton. York chyre. 

Azure a fesse indented gold charged with five scaloppys of 
gules. Sir Wylyam Plomton. Torkchyre. 

Sable a saltire gold. Sir John Clarways of Kroft. Torke chyre, 



Sable a cheveron gold between three crescents silver. Sir 
Rawf Babthorpe. Yorke chyre. 

Azure a lion gold. Sir Emonde Darrell. Torke chyre. 

Azure a bend gold between six golden cups. ' Sir Richard 
BuTTLER. Lancaster chyre. 

Azure a cheveron gold between three golden cups. Sir John 
BuTTLER. Lancaster chyre. 

Silver a bend sable engrailed. Sir John Radklyffe. Lan- 
caster chyre. 

Azure a fret silver and a border gold with pelettys of gowlys on 
the border. Sir Alysaundyr Lownde. Torke chyre. 

Silver a fesse sable. Sir John Kykeley. lorkechyre. 

Burelly silver and gules a quarter sable with a cross paty gold. 
Sir John of Elton. Torke chyre. 

Sable iij fecys of syhyr. Sir Rycharde Hawghton of Lan- 
caster chyre. 

Silver three cheverons gules. The Baron of Newton. Lan- 
caster chyre. 

Silver a molet sable. [Assheton] Sir Tomas Ayston. Lan- 
caster chyre. Sable iij comhys of silver. Sir Tomas 
DwNSTALL [Tunstall] of Lancaster chyre. 


Silver iij squareleys of porpelL Sir Emond Talbott. Lan- 
caster chyre. 

Silver and gules quarterly. Sir Jafferey Massy of Lancaster 

Silver a cheveron sable between three escallops sable with 
three crescents of silver on the cheveron. Sir John 
SoRTEYS. Torke chyre. 

Silver three boars' heads rased sable. Sir Tomas of Bowthe 
of Lancaster chyre. 

Gold a dance sable. Harry Waveser [Vavasour]. York 

Ermine a cheveron sable with three pierced cinqfoils of gold. 
Stewyn Haytfelde. Torke chyre. 



Gules a fesse silver with iij crowys ofsabyll. John of Por- 
TYNGETON. Torke chyre. 

Sable three running ' leverers ' of silver with collars on their 
necks. Hopkyne Mawleverere. Torke chyre, 

SiIyqv ij fecys fesele ofsabyll. To mas Constabyll of Catty sfosse^ 
Torke chyre. 

Vair a border sable with bezants. Tomas Dalarewer. Torke 

Gold two bars azure with a chief gules. Robarde Manerys. 

North umherlond. 
Azure a cheveron silver between three leopards silver. 

Wyllysthroppe. Tork chyre. 


Silver a cross sable engrailed. John Fytz Henry. Yorke 

Gules three jousting spears silver with their pennons. 
ScHORTHosE. Torke chyre. 

Ermine a cross sable engrailed. Rawf Acclum. Byscboppe 
ryke of Derham. [The name was possibly corrected on a 
slip pasted over the name, which slip is now lost. This 
may be a Pollard coat.] 

Azure a fesse gold between three fleurs de lys gold. Wylyam 
Chaunceler. Byscboppe ryke of Derbam. In a later 
hand the name Skelton is written on the shield. 

Gules a sleeve of silver with an orle of synke foylys of silver. 
Rawfe Acclum. Tork cbyre, [The name is written 
upon a slip pasted over another name.] 

Silver a saltire sable engrailed. Jafferey Myddylton. Lan- 
caster cbyre. 

Silver a fesse sable between three pierced molettys of silver. 

John Pasleue. Torke cbyre. 
Ermine a fesse gules indented. To mas Lyys of tbe byscboppe 

ryke of Derbam. 

Sable a cheveron gold between iij merlettys of gold with three 

pierced molets of gold upon the cheveron. John 

Monkton. Nortbwmberland. 
Sable iij sparebawkys of sylvyr with their bells. To mas 

Hawkysworth. Torke cbyre. 
Azure two bars silver. Hewe of Lyght. Lancaster cbyre. 
A saltire silver with a fleur de lys XLure. Sir John Nevyll. 

Byscboperyke of Derbam. 

Azure iij flowr de lyce of ermyn. John of Borowe. Torke 

Silver three garlands gules. Roger Lasselys. Torke cbyre. 
Gules six rings of gold. Wylyam Vypount of tbe byscboperyke 
of Derham. 

Silver a fesse sable between three fleurs de lys gules with three 
roundels of gold on the fesse. John Twhaytys. Torke 

Gules a lion argent with a border oi gold and <^r^^;^^ gobony. 

John Mowbraye. Nortbumberlond. 
Silver a bend sable engrailed with three molets of silver. 

Nycoll Enttwesyll of tbe byscboperyke of Derbam. 



Gules a voided escutcheon ermine. Baylyaff hord of Baynara 

Azure three bougets gold. Sir Robarde Roos of Tngmana- 

A sal tire charged with a molet [Nevill] quartering gold a 
fesse indented gules quartered with silver a fesse indented 
gules. John Nevell. Torke chyre. 

Sable an escutcheon silver between six owls of silver. Watyr 
Calwerley of Lancaster cbyre. 

Silver a mill sail sable bendwise. The olde armys of New- 


Gules three horses' heads silver cut off at the neck. John 
HoRSSLEYE. JSorth Umberlonde, 


Azure six rings of gold. John Mosgrowe. JVestmerland 

Silver three cheverons sable bezanty. Cothbert Colvyle. 
North Umberlonde, 

Gules a cheveron silver with a green popinjay thereon. Hewe 
Aystlaye of the byschopryk of Derham. 

Ermine a saltire gules. Wylyam Scargyll. Torke chyre. 

Silver three rooks of the chess sable. Wylyam Eltofte. 

Gold billetty azure with a lion azure. Sir Gyggard Count 
DE Hon[tingdon]. [This is the shield of Sir Guiscard 
d Angle, K.G., who in 1377 was created Earl of Hunting- 
don for life.] 

Gules a bend silver. Robard Prendergest. Northumherlonde. 

Barry gold and azure with a quarter silver and a garland gules 
on the quarter, quartyrly Wastney armys. Robarde 
Holme. Torke chyre. 

Silver crusilly fitchy sable with three horse-shoes sable. 
Robarde Bowth. Nor thumb erlond. 

Silver a fleur de lys sable. Rycharde Fyscheborne of the 
byschopperyke of Derham, 

Sable a lion silver with an orle of synkefoyles of sylvyr. Sir 
Gerways of Clyffton. Notyngham chyre. 

Silver a cheveron sable engrailed between iij wolfe hedys of sabyll 
rased. Harry Preston of Cravyn. 



Silver a bend gold and gules cheeky. Rawlyx Vaux. Cum- 
herlond chyre. 

Gules a bend sable with iij roosys of golde, Edward Clayton. 
Lancaster chyre. 

Silver three swine sable armyd wyth gold. John of Swyxowe. 

Gules three cocks silver. Nycolas Blauxton of the byschoppe- 
ryke of Derhain. 

Azure three crescents gold. Sir Wylyam Ryther of York 

Gules two fesses indented between iij semewys silver. John 
Sayer of the byschopperyke of Deram chyre. 


Silver a lion gules with a fesse sable athwart him. Costantyne 

Sable three escallops silver. Rycharde Arnolde of Holdyr- 

A hunting horn. Nycolas Belyngham. Lancaster chyre. 

Silver a bend sable with three sheaves of silver. To mas 

Haskett. Lancaster chyre. 
Gules three pillows of silver with their tassels. Rycharde 

Redmayne. Torke chyre. 
Sabyll iij dyschys of sylvyr quartered with silver a saltire sable 

and a border sable. Rawfe Standysche. Lane, 
A cheveron sable between three crosses paty sable. Tomas 

MosTON of How den chyre. 
Gold a cheveron gules and a chief vair. Sir Anton' Seynt 

QwYNTYNE of Holdemesse. 
Gold a cross gules with five escallops silver. Sir Rawfe 


Silver a cheveron gules between iij hyndys hedys rased gules. 
Wylyam Fayrefax. York chyre. 

Silver and gules lozengy. John Fetz Wylyam of York chyre. 

Silver a saltire gules and a chief gules with three escallops 
silver thereon. Wylyam Taylboys, Lyncolle chyre. 

Gules a saltire silver with a molet sable. Sir Alysaundyr 
Nevyll. Torke chyre. 

Silver a millrind cross sable with a crescent thereon for differ- 
ence. Sir Tomas Folthorpe. Torke chyre. 

Gules a lion silver with a bend azure. Sir Pyersse Tylyall 
of Coumberlande. 


Silver a fret gules and a chief azure. Sir Cyrstoffyr 
CoRWENE of Comberland, 

Ermine a fret gules and a chief gules. Wylyam Thqryn- 


Quarterly indented gules and ermine with a goat's head 
ermine in the quarter. Charlys Morton. 

Sable a cross silver with a cinqfoil in the quarter. Morysby. 
Westm erlande. 

Green a fret silver. Tomas Salkell of Comherlana, 

Silver a fret sable and a quarter sable. Tomas Myddylton of 

Silver a fret gules with a chief of gules. Rychard Salkell 
of Westmerland, 

Gold a bend sable with three pierced molets of silver [Hot- 
ham]. John Howton. 

Silver a lion azure with an orle of crosslets gules. Sir 
Wylyam Mountfort. 

Sable a cheveron silver between three pots or posnets of silver. 
Wylyam Wystowe. 

Silver an eagle sable armyd wyth goulys. Rychard Wylbyr- 
FORSE of Tork chyre. 

Checkered gold and azure with a bend gules and three leo- 
pards gold rampant on the bend. Harry Clyfford, 
Gloucester chyre. 

Azure a cheveron ermine. [This is a Lodbroke coat.] Sir 
John Abbnall. 

Silver a saltire gules. Sir Robard Nevyll. Tork chyre of 

Azure three roses gold. Thomas Cyscyle. Torke chyre yn 
How den chyre. 



Gold a cheveron gules with a border of sable engrailed. Sir 
Umffrey Stafforde. Dorsset chyre. 

Gold three roundels gules with a label azure. Sir Phelype 
CoRTENEY. Devynchyre, 

Azure crusilly [gold] a lion gold. Sir John Brewse of Sowsex, 

Gules a fesse indented ermine. Sir John Denham. Devene 

Silver three demi-lions gules. Sir William Stormye of 
Worcester chyre. 

Gules a soldan's head silver cut ofF at the neck [Sowdan] 
quartering sable three pales silver wavy. Sir Percywall 
Sowdane of Walys voryn. 


Ermine a chief azure with three lyonseuse of silver. Sir John 
Lyle. Hampchyre, 

Ermine three bars gules. Sir Henry House of Sowesx [sic]. 

Silver a chief gules with two pierced molets silver. Sir John 
Sengone [St. John] of Walys, 

Gold a fesse gules between six crosslets gules. Sir John 
Greynder of Glowcester chyre. 

Silver a cheveron gules engrailed between three leopards' heads 
the lehardys hedys goulys as the cheveron ys [Halsham] 
quartered with paly gold and sable. [Strabolgi] Sir 
Hewe Halsam of Sowsex, [Sir Hugh Halsham died in 

Azure two cheverons gold. Sir Thomas Chaworthe. 

Notyngham chyre. 
Silver a chief gules with ij hertys hedys golae. Sir John 

PoPHAM. Hampchyre, 
Bendy gold and azure of eight pieces with a border gules. 

Sir William Mountfort. Warrewyk chyre. 
Gules a cheveron silver. [The field is crusilly with crosslets 

indicated by plain crossed lines, thus, 4- ; the words 

the crossys syhyr in the margin appear to have been struck 

out.] Sir Morres of Berkeleye. Cambyge chyre. 
Azure a bend gold — a crescent for difference. Carmynowe. 

Devene chyre. 

Ermine a chief party gold and gules indented, with a rose 
gules on the gold. [Shottisbroke] Sir Rawfe Chottys- 
BROKE. Oxynford chyre. 

Silver a fret sable with a quarter gules. Sir Richard Wer- 
nun of the Peke^ Derby chyre. 


Sable three bells of silver. Sir Wylyam Porter of Lyncolle 

Azure a cheveron gold between three leopards' heads gold. 
Sir Harry Frowyke of Myddyllsex cbyre. 

Gules a cheveron ermine between three fleurs de lys gold. 
Sir John Mwngomery of Walys, 

Sylvyr ana aseure pale a bend gules with three cinqfoils gold. 

Sir Edwarde Stradlyng of Walys, 
Silver iij roos of purpuU. Alyxaundyr Sparrowe of Myadyll- 


Gules a cheveron gold with iij sterrys of sable. Sir Raynalde 
CoBHAM of Sowtherey chyre. 


Sable a cheveron ermine between three wings silver [Nanfan] 
quartering silver two wolves azure. John Nanfan of 

Azure a fesse gold between ' quatre mains ' ot gold [Quatre- 
main] quartered with silver ij mongrelys of goulys [BretonJ. 
John Catyrmaynys. Oxynford chyre. 

Sable a faucon sylvyr armyd gola. To mas of Yeddynge. 
Myddyhex chyre. 

Party silver and gules with a bend countercoloured. This is 
the shield of the poet. Jafferey Chawserys [Chaucer]. 
Oxynford chyre. 

Gold and aseure losange. Wylyam Warbylton. Hampchyre. 
Barry wavy of four pieces silver and gules and a bend sable 

with three golden crescents on the bend. Tomas Gollo- 

ffyr. Oxynford chyre. 
Gules a millrind cross silver [Uvedale] quartering azure a fret 

gold [ScuREs]. Tomas Vedale. Hampchyre. 
Bendy gold and azure with a border of gules engrailed. John 

Newborowe. Dorsset chyre. 
Sable a leopard rampant gold [Brocas] quartered with sable two 

leopards silver [Roches]. Wylyam Brocase of Hampt- 


[To be continued.) 



Sir — 

I observe in ^he Ancestor a paper in which the editor has 
been kind enough to direct attention to my little book, The 
White Company^ and to overwhelm it with such a mass of genial 
praise and ponderous irony that the impression left upon the 
mind of the unfortunate author, who is alternately saluted and 
belaboured, is a very mixed one. For the praise, all thanks ! 
For information which is new, all thanks also ! The best pay- 
ment I can make for it is to return some of it in cases where, 
in the most humble and respectful way possible, I may venture 
to hint to this terrible specialist that he is himself misinformed. 

I can assure him in the first place that I did not, as he 
seems to imagine, invent my heraldic details. Such a book as 
The White Company^ dealing with so many special subjects as 
medieval social life, monastic institutions, archery, heraldry, 
land and sea warfare, etc., forbids an exhaustive study of any 
one question ; but I have columns of books and sheaves of notes 
to show that during a year's reading I took some pains to equip 
myself for the work which has caused such trouble to the 
editor's somewhat over critical spirit. 

As to the question of whether the particular crest or arms 
of any family quoted were exactly as described in that year, or 
were so some years later, or even whether there is some in- 
exactness of detail is really not of great moment. I had always 
a reason for my description, but to give it in each case would 
mean a considerable labour in reference. So in my detail of 
actual costume, etc. The herald's dress, ' heraldic barret cap 
with triple plume,' is taken not from Covent Garden, as the 
editor somewhat unkindly asserts, but from a contemporary or 
at least a medieval authority. I can assure him also that I had 
other support than Lewis Carroll's for the assertion that heralds 
blew on trumpets and wore tabards. Such criticism as this is 
not helpful nor soothing. 

To take a few concrete examples where the editor in 




accusing me of inaccuracy has been inaccurate himself : he says 
that the cadency mark of crescents for the second son only 
came in two centuries later than the date of ne White Company, 
That date is 1367. The editor will find — and it is a real 
pleasure to give him some information after all that he has 
given to me — that in a window of the Collegiate Church of 
St. Mary, Warwick, erected in 136 1, the arms of the six sons of 
Thomas Beauchamp, fifteenth Earl of Warwick, appear dif- 
ferenced with a crescent, mullet, etc. It is probable therefore 
that the custom was perfectly well known to the prince's 
^herald and scrivener.* That such a man should not know or 
speak of Saxons is absurd. Many of the oldest families in the 
kingdom were of pre-Norman descent, and even the most 
pedantic of medieval heralds could not ignore their origin. 

The editor belabours me on the question of 'arms ' or 
* crests ' upon shields or flags. Of course either arms or crests 
might be on either. At tournaments it was usual for the 
knight to exhibit two shields, one with his hereditary bearings 
and the other with his badge or impress. The Black Prince in 
his will mentions both shields. As to the flags, the arms were 
on the banner, and the crest might be on the standard. It is 
hypercriticism then to speak contemptuously of my text upon 
these points. 

The editor quotes a blazoning and declares it to be too 
complex for that age. Possibly it does err upon that side. 
But naturally the knight would choose the most complex in 
testing the skill of a novice. In the blazonings mentioned in 
' The Roll of Caerlaverock ' (a.d. 1300) he will find some fairly 
complex arms. In this very number of Ancestor one is 
given ' Azure three bars gold and a chief of gold with three 
pales and two gyrons of azure with an escutcheon of silver over 
all.' This dates from only a little later than ^he White Com- 
pany and is as complex as the coat of arms in the text. 

Finally, I can assure the editor that it is all right about 
the Cross of St. George. I have several times seen it in the 
course of a life which has included some long ocean voyages. 
There is no mistake upon my part, but just a little want of 
picturesque imagination upon his. The lions were the 
national emblem upon the English flag, St. George was the 
national saint. To speak of the lion of St. George was not 
to speak of it as a heraldic sign, but rather as the lion which 
is the symbol of the land of St. George. Shockingly in- 


accurate no doubt, but an imaginative writer demands some 
imaginative sympathy and response from his reader. 

For all concerning Charing Cross, all thanks. I am quite 
mistaken about it. As to Henry's saddle, I am proud to find 
that I err with Dean Stanley. 

Finally, let me conjure the editor to use his expert know- 
ledge to encourage the novelist to study and to convey to his 
readers som.e of the glamour and interest of the past, instead of 
employing a carping and niggling style of criticism which might 
well discourage the writer from endeavouring to get accuracy 
of detail, since no man — not even the editor of The Ancestor — 
can hope to get all his detail accurate. 

Yours faithfully, 


[Under the heading of * Editorial Notes ' we have endeavoured to defend 
ourselves against Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's brilliant counter-attack.] 


Sir — 

In a notice in No. 2 of The Ancestor of a paper of mine on 
'The Lowthers who held Judicial Office in Ireland in the 
Seventeenth Century,' the writer — not unnaturally, perhaps — 
expressed, or hinted, some doubt as to the accuracy of a state- 
ment that the will of Sir Gerard Lowther, one of the Justices 
of the Common Pleas in Ireland, dated September 24, 1624, 
was on parchment^ and suggested that I might possibly have 
mistaken the probate copy of the will for the original. 

But there has been no mistake in the matter. I was quite 
aware that wills on parchment were almost unknown in England, 
and I was familiar with the passage in Mr. Walter Rye's 
Records and Record Searching referred to by the reviewer ; but 
as my paper was intended to be read before a meeting of the 
Cumberland and Westmoreland Antiquarian and Archaeological 
Society at Durham, I thought that many of my hearers would 
be interested in learning that, in this case at least, a parchment 
will was not a creature of the imagination of a novelist. 

That the document is an original will is beyond all question. 
It bears the signature of Sir Gerard Lowther, the testator, and 
the signatures of the three attesting witnesses — each in its own 
peculiar handwriting — and the pendant seal attached has the 




outline of an armorial shield, the charges on which have dis- 
appeared from pressure and rubbing. On the back of the will 
is indorsed : ' Sir Gerrard Lowther his last Will and Testa- 
ment ' ; and when the document was lodged for probate a 
further endorsement of Testamentum Gerardi Lowther milit ' was 
placed on it by some official of the Prerogative Court. 

It was not uncommon in Ireland in the seventeenth and 
part of the eighteenth century that wills should be engrossed 
on parchment. I have come across many of them in my own 
researches, and the officials of the Public Record Office in 
Dublin inform me, that amongst the wiUs proved in the 
Prerogative Court in Ireland, those on parchment are to be 
reckoned by hundreds. Up to the present, I have not met 
with any will on parchment amongst those proved in the 
Diocesan Courts in Ireland. 

The copies of wills annexed to grants of probate were on 
parchment, but these were not retained in the Prerogative or 
Consistorial Courts, and v/ould not be found in the Public Record 
Office. If for special reasons the original wiU was required to 
l)e kept by the executors, a transcript or exemplification of it 
would be made on parchment or paper, and lodged in the Court 
from which the probate issued. This document, however, 
would express on the face of it that it was a copy, and would 
contain a statement as to the handing over of the original will. 

This use of parchment for wills in Ireland was, no doubt, 
simply with a view to their better preservation. WiUs, even 
though dealing with personal estate as well as realty, were often 
left unproved, and are met with occasionally amongst the 
muniments of title of not inconsiderable estates. 

I am, Sir, your obedient servant, 


40 FiTz WILLI AM Place, Dublin, 
29 Nove?nber^ 1902. 


Dear Sir — 

With reference to my note on this subject in the second 
number of The Ancestor^ may I say that the armed figure on 
the side of the dexter supporter of the Earl of Cowrie's shield 
was certainly not introduced by John, third Earl, who was 


slain in 1600. The figure appears in 1582, on a stone carved 
with the arms of William, first Earl. The stone is now in 
the museum of the Scottish Antiquaries, being the gift of 
Lord Ruthven, to whom I am indebted for a photograph of 
the object. The device left by the third Earl in Padua, and 
sent to King James in 1609, is another affair, and is described 
in my former letter. 


St. Andrews, 

22 November^ 1902. 


Sir — 

The simplification of heraldry as treated in The Ancestor is 
most interesting to all to whom ancient armorial bearings are 
as regimental colours are to regiments in the present day. 

Perhaps the following may to some extent supply addi- 
tional proof, if such be required. 

I have by me an original grant of differenced arms in 1 540 
(temp. Hen. VIIL) to Hever of Cookfield, co. Sussex, a cadet 
branch of Hever of Heverwood in Surrey, signed and sealed 
by Thomas Hawley, Clarencieux King of Arms. 

The arms are thus described : ' Gules and vert quarterly 
on a chevron engrailed silver three sheaves gules banded 
betwixt three cats sauvage passant gold Upon his helm on a 
torse gules and vert a cat of the mountain in her proper 
colour, sitting holding in her mouth a goldfinch,' etc. 

From this it would appear that though there is much 
unnecessary embroidery of language, the wording is clear 
compared with that of the heraldry of Elizabeth's and 
subsequent reigns. 

For here are found silver for argent^ sheaves for garhs^ 
gold for or, sitting for sejant^ and a torse of two colours 
instead of a colour and metal, the whole being authorized by a 
Tudor College of Arms. 

I am. Sir, your obedient servant, 


HoLYPORT, Berks, 
Oct. 29, 1902. 




Sir — 

From the Parish Registers of Halstead, the following 
additional information relating to Sir Samuel Trj-on/ 2nd 
Baronet, can be supplied : — 

III. Sir Samuel Tryon of Halstead was buried 25 
November 1664. His first wife Bridget, Lady Try-on, was 
buried at Halstead, 10 July 1654. 

His widow married (ii) Timothy Thornbur^- and had a 
daughter Lois, baptised at Halstead, 20 March i66|-. 

iii. Samuel John Tryon, eldest son of Sir Samuel by Susan 

Harvey, the second wife, died in infancy and was buried 
at Halstead, i November 1655. 

iv. Sir Samuel John Tryon, 4th and last baronet, of Bore- 

ham, Essex, died at Boreham 24 April 1720, aged 64, 
and was buried at Halstead. 

1. Mar}' Tr}-on, daughter and coheir, was bap- 

tised at Boreham, 15 April 1690. 

2. Susan Tryon, daughter and coheir, married at 

Boreham, 13 November 171 5, Barnaby Gibson 
of Little Stonham, Suffolk, Gent. 

v. John Trv'on was born at Halstead 24 Feb. 16 §f. 

Sir Samuel Trvon, bv his second wife Susan Harvev, had 
a daughter Susan baptised at Halstead, i February i66|- and 
buried there 15th December 1669. 

I can find no mention in the Halstead Register of the two 
sons named Moses, nor of the daughter called Anne. 

I am. Sir, 

Your obedient servant, 


[To these valuable notes of Mr. Sperling's we have the 
following notes to add. ?vlargaret, the wife of Governor 
Tr}'on, was the dauo^hter and heir of William Wake, president 
and governor of Bombay. Governor Wake died at the end 
of Jan. I "5-1 on his voyage from Bombay. He was son of 
Robert Wake of Thurning, co. Norfolk, gent. His relict 
Elizabeth, who was of the Norfolk family of Elwin of Thurn- 
ing, died 19 June 1759, and was buried at Thurning (m.i.). 
He made a wiU 29 Sept. I'sO which, with a codicil 24 Jan. 
I75t-, was proved in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury 

^ Ancestor, ii. 183. 


(163 Busby) 23 May 1751, by Peter and Joseph Godfrey, 
whom the testator had made his trustees and executors, 
power being reserved etc. to Elizabeth Wake, the relict and 
executrix. The will names no Wake kinsfolk, and in the 
event of the testator's daughter dying without surviving 
issue, Thomas and Edward Phipps, sons of William Phipps, 
the late governor of Bombay, are to inherit. 

The will of Sir Samuel John Tryon of Boreham in Essex, 
the fourth and last Tryon baronet, the date of whose death is 
corrected by Mr. Sperling to 24 April 1720, has been found 
amongst the wills proved in the Archdeaconry Court of Essex. 
He desired to be buried near his father's grave in the chancel 
of Halstead church, with an inscription : Here lies the body of 
Sir Samuell John Tryon the last baronet of that Family, He gave 
his plate and linen to his wife Dame Mary Tryon, his execu- 
trix. He gave his manor of Burrells with its lands in Raw- 
reth and Wickford to his granddaughter Mary Davy for life, 
with remainder to her issue, with remainder to his nephew 
Samuel Henderson. If his daughter Susan Gibson died 
without issue the said Mary Davy was to have Gladfen Hall 
with its lands, with like remainders. After his wife's death the 
said Mary was to have the reversion of Letches farm in Hal- 
stead, with remainder to her issue, with remainder to testator's 
nephew Henry Henderson. To the said Mary Davy he gave 
two farms in Great and Little Maplestead, with remainder, in 
default of issue of her, to his two nieces Susan and Eunice 
Henderson. To the said Mary Davy and her issue he gave a 
farm called Loveday Well and a farm in Halstead and Stisted 
with remainder to her issue, with remainder in default of such 
issue to the testator's sister Susan Henderson. This will, 
dated 3 Nov. 1719, was proved 19 May 1721 by the relict, 
powers being reserved to Mary Davy, the other executrix, 
who was a minor. Although Eleanor Tryon, half-sister of 
Sir Samuel John Tryon, had carried most of the Tryon 
estates away to the Franklyns, this will would seem to dispose 
of the story that the testator died in any notable poverty.] 



THE controversy so happily begun in the first number 
of 57?^ Ancestor concerning the English gentleman and 
his ancient standing has not, we hope, ceased to interest our 
readers. But we cannot allow this controversy to continue 
as a battle over the gentility of Mr. Thomas Brassey, a matter 
which, judging from the letters before us, may be said to be as 
hotly in dispute as were the gentilities of Richard Barker and 
William Exelby. Our correspondent the ' Learned Clerk ' of 
No. 2 was countered by Mr. Reade in No. 3 and we hold 
back with some regret a new correspondent, ' Ap Japheth ' to 
wit, who would tear Mr. Reade's letter from our pages. Owd 
Tom Brassey, it is allowed, could write his name, but he 
wrote it with difficulty at the end of ill-spelled documents. 
It is denied that in his youth he was articled to a land-surveyor, 
and the ancient extraction of his family is said to have been 
bluntly denied by its homely representative. The authority 
of Thomas Brassey himself is again quoted us in denial of Mr. 
Reade's statement that his father possessed an estate at Buerton 
or elsewhere. For the discussion of these matters however 
we can give little of our space. Lord Brassey himself has 
declared his willingness to begin his pedigree with his famous 
father, an ancestor and house-founder if ever there was one, 
and in the Brassey peerage we find nothing ridiculous. 

With one feature of the Brassey dispute we may concern 
ourselves. We understand that Lord Brassey was officially 
allowed, as of right, the ancient arms of Bressy or Bresci. 
Our latest correspondent insists, and not without warmth, that 
this house is long extinct in the male line, and that the arms 
of Bressy passed to the Bulkeleys, descendent from a Bulkeley 
marriage with the Eressy heiress. With any contention that 
the ' whole coat ' of a family should be the right of its head 
alone and should pass in due course only to its true representa- 
tives we have every sympathy, for such was the ancient practice, 
now disregarded by the heralds. 

But it is well known that the ' whole coat,' by the practice 


of our modern heralds, is allowed to any cadet of the house 
who can show a male descent from its bearer. This, we 
understood. Lord Brassey had shown, and if this be so, although 
we may blame the College of Arms for its admission of such a 
principle into armory, we cannot in fairness give blame for 
its application in a particular case. Though we are unacquain- 
ted with the rules of the College of Arms for its practice in 
dealing with genealogical evidences, we profess ourselves unable 
to believe that a pedigree based upon mere statement has in 
our own time been allowed to pass its examining officers. 

* * * 

^ Ap Japheth ' finds reason for taking us to task in Mr. 
Reade's statement that Thomas Brassey, ' though not of gentle 
birth, save in the technical or heraldic sense, yet came of a 
good yeoman stock,' and this on the ground, if we follow his 
argument, that the sentence contains a ' contradictory heraldic 
assertion.' We find no such contradiction. Mr. Reade, to 
our mind, refers in the first part of his sentence to the belief of 
certain modern writers that some unsubstantial nobility is in 
the blood of the remotest descendant of the bearer of a coat of 
arms. Such belief we hasten to repudiate for l^he Ancestor. A 
yeoman — and there are English counties where the class sur- 
vives yet — is a yeoman to-day and would be a yeoman to- 
morrow, even if an antiquary should happen upon a De Banco 
Roll entry or Chancery Plea which should show him descended 
from a Domesday tenant-in-chief. It is but the other day that 
a genealogist showed us some evidence which would go to 
connect a west-country yeoman family with an ancestry which, 
if we read the riddle of his name aright, ' Ap Japheth ' would 
call princely. 

* * « 

We owe to Mr. P. J. de Carteret, the genealogist of his 
ancient house, some notes in addition to the account, in our 
last issue, of the Carterets of St. Ouen. Mr. Carteret points 
out that our reference to Jane Anne Le Maistre, wife of Elias 
Le Maistre, is couched in a misleading form. This lady, who 
became Dame de St. Ouen on the death of Robert, Earl of 
Granville, was by birth a Dumaresq. Her great-grandson, 
Edward Charles Malet de Carteret, to-day the twenty-eighth 
Seigneur of St. Ouen, has admirably restored the ancient 
manoir which was falling into ruin. On his adding his name 



to the long list of Carterets who have been elected jurats, 
he was granted precedence of all his fellow-jurats for that 
he was Seigneur of St. Ouen and representative of the 
Carterets. This ancient right of precedence has always been 
with the Seigneurs of St. Ouen, and was confirmed by several 
orders in council under Charles II. 

* * * 

A note of the greatest interest which had escaped us in our 
survey of the Carterets is pointed out to us by our correspon- 
dent. It is that from about iioo to the death of Sir Charles 
de Carteret in 171 5 the manor of St. Ouen descended without 
a break from father to son, a record which is surely a very 
remarkable one. For a case of the reverse fortune our readers 
have only to refer to our article on the family of Knightley of 
Fawsley. Since the sixteenth century at least Fawsley has 
hardly ever descended for more than one generation in a direct 
line. Again and again have direct heirs failed and cousins 
been called in to the inheritance, until in our own time it 
seems as though in a coming generation Fawsley will seek in 
vain for cadets of the house of Knightley. 

We have received from the solicitors to Sir Lambton 
Loraine a letter directing our attention to a deed poll lately 
executed under his hand, which deed poll is addressed 
especially to His Majesty's officers of arms, with whom Sir 
Lambton Loraine would appear to have a very pretty quarrel 
and one of the greatest interest to students of English armo- 
rial practice. 

Abandoning Whereas and Whereas Sir Lambton's case 
would appear to be as follows. His family of Loraine is an 
ancient one, seated at Kirkharle in Northumberland in the 
fifteenth century, matching with the gentle houses of North- 
umberland, being tenants in chief of the Crown, and styled 
squires in the inquests held after their deaths and in other 
records and muniments. They bore arms as of ancient right 
and custom, their shield being quarterly sable and silver with 
a cross quarterly and counter-coloured, which Sir Lambton's 
solicitors describe with unnecessary detail as ' sometimes repre- 
sented as hung by its guige [O blessed word of the Hand- 



books of Heraldry !] on its supporter a bay laurel tree couped 
with two branches sprouting out proper.' 

* * * 

Of this family Robert Loraine is at home at Kirkharle 
when William Flower, Norroy King of Arms, is 'visiting' 
Northumberland in 1575, and his arms and lineage might well 
be looked for in the visitation book of that county. But they 
are neglected ' as were the pedigrees and arms of nearly all the 
noble and gentle men then seated in the said county of North- 
umberland.' Loraine abides at Kirkharle, a squire of name 
and land, and in due time comes Sir Richard St. George, 
knight, Norroy King of Arms, a-visiting Northumberland, 
but in his book, as in Flower's, no pedigree is set down for 
the squire of Kirkharle. Tombstones and escheators' inquests 
still give the family the style of their rank, their crossed shield 
is still displayed by them unquestioned upon stone and brass 
and wax, and in 1664 Thomas Loraine of Kirkharle is created 
a baronet. 

* * * 

Before this time the heralds have moved. William Loraine, 
a cadet of the house and uncle to the first baronet, at the age 
of twenty-three years obtains from Sir John Borough, Garter 
King of Arms, a certificate of his arms. The arms in this 
certificate are described as ' argent a pale fusilly azure in 
the dexter chief point an escutcheon of the last,' a shield for 
which no ancient authority may be found, and a shield very 
unlike the quartered cross of Loraine. With the new shield 
went a crest as new as the shield. 

* * * 

This shield with a variant of the new crest is pictured 
beside the pedigree entered by Sir William Dugdale in the 
visitation book of 1666, at which date the Loraines are at last 
discovered by the heralds in the ancient home of Kirkharle. 
But with this new coat and crest the Northumbrian Loraines, 
as may be guessed, meddle not. Their old coat is good 
enough for them : the first baronet seals his will with it, and 
it is borne by those who follow him. Wherefore Sir Lambton 
Loraine, baronet and rear-admiral, declares in his deed poll 
that he does not ' for the reasons hereinbefore given accept as 
arms proper to be attached to the family pedigree of Loraine 
of Kirkharle the arms designed by Sir John Borough Knight,' 



and that he has used after the custom of his forefathers, and 
shall on all occasions in future use, the arms of those fore- 

* * * 

We have every sympathy with Sir Lambton Loraine, and 
with his desire to use the shield which his forefathers bore' 
in the border wars rather than the shield whose story begins 
and ends with its being neatly tricked with pen and ink in 
two seventeenth-century register books. But we watch him 
with a fearful interest as he goes with his sailor-like reckless- 
ness towards his doom. Let him remain obstinate in his 
determination, and nothing will save him. Pitying and help- 
less we shall see his name written in some dictionary of 
Armorial Gents with his arms in all the shame of italics and 
himself exposed to all the social ignominy which notoriously 
attends the contumacious and non-armigerous gent. 

* * * 

Four volumes of 'The Ancestor now lie before our readers, 
and in face of the manifold errors and inaccuracies of these four 
volumes the editor is fain to acknowledge sorrowfully that the 
last phrase of Sir Conan Doyle's reply to us finds its mark. 
Infallibility is not with us. But turning to the beginning ot 
Sir Conan's letter we must hasten to add that none of the 
corrections we seek for have come to us through Sir Conan 

* * * 

Sir Conan bids us look in his letter for payment in kind 
for the information we have given him. In the humblest 
fashion let us assure him that he has as yet wiped out nothing 
of his debt. 

* * * 

Surely no misunderstanding of the meaning of our article on 
' The Antiquary and the Novelist ' is possible 1 Well we know 
that there be ' nine and sixty ways of constructing tribal lays,' 
and that Sir Conan's way is one of the nine and sixty and as 
right as any of the others. Be it far from us that we should 
be suspected of a desire to teach Sir Conan how the bricks of 
romance should be laid. But with detail of a certain nature 
The Ancestor has its concern. Of this detail we find an abun- 
dance has gone to the making of The White Company^ and after 


considering it gravely and with due care we find it has been in 
nearly every case mishandled and mistaken. 

* * * 

Sir Conan's answer is the answer of the Bellman : ^ What 
I tell you three times is true/ but Sir Conan has more than 
the bellman's imperiousness, and what he has asserted a second 
time must be accepted by us. 

* * * 

In this matter Sir Conan has chosen to meet us as an 
antiquary, and as such his authority must needs be of the 
slightest. To the nearest Caesar of archaeology we appeal, 
asking whether a man to whom the cabstand monument in 
Charing Cross station represents a ' beautiful old stone cross * 
hallowed by six hundred years of memories speaks with such 
authority in archaeological matters that his unsupported word 
can be taken in evidence. 

* * * 

Yet it is with mere assertion that Sir Conan would bear us 
down. We deny that our criticism can be truly described as 
carping and niggling. Had we used such our article would 
have been spun to a tedious length. It is upon the question 
of armory that we must first defend ourselves. Sir Conan 
very properly disclaims pedantic exactness for his many 
blazons of arms, but declares that he had always a good reason 
for his description. If he told us that his armory was frankly 
fancywork to colour the page withal he would be well within 
his rights as a novelist, but we may well complain of the 
repeated assertion that the colour is true in the main and based 
upon good authority. What good reason, forsooth, can be 
shown for the swan wings of Beauchamp or for the ' roebuck 
gules on a field argent ' of Montague ? The good reason for 
these, we are to believe, could be found by Sir Conan if he 
could afford the labour of referring to it. We deny that any 
such reason exists. 

* * * 

In the matter of costume, too, the word of Sir Conan's 
answer must content us. Does he describe the salade as the 
characteristic tilting helm of the days of Chandos, the brigandine 
as a confection of chainmail } Sir Conan points to his locked 
bookshelves for all reply. Sir Conan's heralds are tabarded 
Jacks of all trades, at once presented to us as heralds, as 



scriveners -and-as musicians or trumpeters, and to those who 
question the accuracy of the presentation Sir Conan replies 
that he has ' support for the assertion.' 

Back again with our armory we find Sir Nigel Loring's 
companions bearing their ' crests ' on their banners as well as 
on their shields. Naked assertion must confirm the custom. 

* Of course/ says Sir Conan, ' either arms or crests might be on 
either.' If Sir Conan Doyle can show instances of this practice 
in the fourteenth century he should not delay to add to our 
knowledge of the armory of that period, but if he cannot show 
such his ' of course ' is of little value. The passage which 
follows concerning the Black Prince's will, a document suffi- 
ciently well known to antiquaries, only serves to show that 
Sir Conan has not pushed his armorial studies far enough to 
understand the distinction between the crest and the badge. 
The medley of figures presented by the ' standard ' in ages long 
after our period is not to the purpose. We are dealing with 
the fourteenth century and with its banners. 

^ ^ ^ 

It is difficult, as Sir Conan Doyle is not familiar with 
the customs or practice of medieval armory, to make it 
clear to him why his Alleyne Edricson should not in the 
fourteenth century blazon a shield to Sir Nigel's satisfaction 
as ' argent a fesse azure charged with three lozenges dividing 
three mullets sable, over all on an escutcheon of the first a 
jambe gules.' We say that if Sir Conan examines this shield 
he will find it incompletely blazoned even by the rules of 
his handbook of heraldry, and may add that the fourteenth 
century not having as yet invented the handbook's formula 
for blazoning shields. Master Alleyne could hardly be asked 
to pass his little-go in the use of that formula under the 
approving eye of Sir Nigel. Sir Conan's ' argent ' and his 

* escutcheon of the first' are both far away from his period. 
As a copy of every known roll of English arms is now amongst 
the writer's manuscripts, it is useless to refer him for information 
to the Roll of Caerlaverock. Neither this nor any other roll 
has any support for Sir Conan, nor will any fourteenth century 
armorial document give the least colour to Sir Nigel's mxost 
amazing boast of the sixty-four noble quarterings of his shield, 


a phrase of which no Englishman of his time or near it could 
have guessed the meaning. 

« « « 

We come at last to the one and only point at which Sir 
Conan has an answer ready for us. Sir Conan asserted that the 
crescent was in the fourteenth century already an established 
* difference ' for the shield of a second son and we mocked at 
the idea. And now Sir Conan, with ' real pleasure ' in giving 
us the information, tells of a window erected in 1361 in the 
Collegiate Church of St. Mary in Warwick, wherein the arms 
of the sons of Thomas Beauchamp, the Earl of Warwick, 
appear with these differences. Sir Conan may stint his pleasure 
for his information can have no foundation other than some 
passage in a handbook of heraldry. 

« « 4$ 

No such window, we believe, exists at the present day, 
although the figures of the earl's sons are found in seventeenth 
century drawings, at which date there remained some in a 
window of the choir, and some in the great north window. 
The choir was not built in 1361, having been begun in pur- 
suance of the will of the earl who died in 1369. After the 
choir was built the nave was begun, and when the great north 
window was finished these images of the Beauchamps were at 
last placed in position. But Sir Conan's date matters little. 
What does matter is that, although the younger sons difference 
their arms, as did many fourteenth-century knights, with small 
charges, the ' cadency mark of the descent for the second son * 
is not to be found, the second son differencing with a ring. 
As therefore, in the only case in which Sir Conan is bold 
enough to quote authority, that authority crumbles on 
handling, the value of his other assertions suffers sympathet- 

* * * 

What can we say to Sir Conan's explanation of the ' red 
lion of Saint George' ? We confess that we can make nothing 
of it. ' To speak of the Lion of St. George was not to speak 
of it as a heraldic sign but rather as the Lion which is the 
symbol of the land of St. George. . . . The Lions were the 
national emblem upon the English flag.' 

* * * 

But Sir Conan, if he will pardon us, does speak of the 



lion of St. George as a heraldic sign. Not in one but in 
many passages does he describe this ^ red lion ' as the 
national badge borne by every English archer. No red lion 
has ever appeared in an English banner, nor was any red lion 
ever recognized as a symbol of the land of St. George, 
although it appears on the banner of the king of the land of 
St. Andrew. Sir Conan has reason for his complaint. When 
we see the glorious red cross of Saint George, the ancient 
national emblem of our race, exchanged for a red lion without 
significance or historic associations, our ' imaginative sympathy ' 
fails us altogether. 

We offer our hearty thanks to Sir Conan for that he has 
met us in fair field, and we repeat that blame for any errors in 
'The White Company is with the makers of bad handbooks of 
archaeology and not with the novelist. That Sir Conan has, as 
he asserts, read columns of books is but too apparent, in every 
page of his romance. Had he read but his Froissart, his 
Chaucer and his Langland, and kept his bookshelves clear of 
the rest, The White Company would have been the better book 
and its author beyond our criticism. 

Butler & Tanner, The Selwocd Printing Works, Frome, and London. 


For 1903 

Illustrated with Twelve Coloured Plates 
of the Arms of families of distinction, 
drawn in the Mediaeval Style, de- 
signed and arranged by 


His Majesty the King signified his interest 
in this attempt at the popularization of Heraldry 
by ordering a supply of the 1902 issue of the 
St. Georges Kalendar for his personal use. 

Price \s. net; post free li*. \d, 

M.A.P. : The brightest bit of colour printing I have seen 
for some time are the admirably executed heraldic blazons 
which illustrate the St. George s Kalendar. 

ARMY AND NAVT GAZETTE: An attractive pro- 
duction which will please those interested in heraldry. 

JTESTMINSTER GAZETTE : The dates noted are those 
of historical events, of saints, religious festivals and battles, but 
the principal feature is the introduction of a dozen heraldic 
emblems pertaining to historical English houses, boldly drawn 
■and coloured. 

MANCHESTER COURIER : Useful and artistic, in addi- 
tion to a well arranged Kalendar it gives the arms printed in 
colours of some of the most ancient houses of the nobility. 




Of the Public Record Office 
4 voh.^ lis, net. 

The Fourth Volume Containing the INTRODUCTION and 
SUPPLEMENT may be purchased separately. 

Price los. 6d. net. 

These Letters are the genuine correspondence of a family in 
Norfolk during the Wars of the Roses. As such they are altogether 
unique in character ; yet the language is not so antiquated as to present 
any serious difficulty to the modern reader. The topics of the letters 
relate partly to the private aflFairs of the family, and partly to the 
stirring events of the time ; and the correspondence includes State 
papers, love-letters, bailiflFs' accounts, sentimental poems, jocular epistles, 

Besides the public news of the day, such as the loss of Normandy 
by the English ; the indictment and subsequent murder at sea of the 
Duke of Suffolk ; and all the fluctuations of the great struggle of York 
and Lancaster ; we have the story of John Paston's first introduction 
to his wife ; incidental notices of severe domestic discipline, in which 
his sister frequently had her head broken ; letters from Dame Elizabeth 
Brews, a match-making mamma, who reminds the youngest John 
Paston that Friday is ' St. Valentine's Day,' and invites him to come 
and visit her family from the Thursday evening till the Monday, etc., 

Every letter has been exhaustively annotated ; and a Chronological 
Table, with most copious Indices, conclude the Work. 

HE NET HALL AM, Introduction to the Literature of Europe, i. 228. Ed. i%t,-j : ''The 

Paston Letters are an important testimony to the progressive condition of Society, and come in 
as a precious link in the chain of moral history of England which they alone in this period 
supply. They stand, indeed, singly, as far as I know, in Europe 5 for though it is highly 
probable that in the archives of Italian families, if not in France or Germany, a series of 
merely private letters equally ancient may be concealed 5 I do not recollect that any have 
been published. They are all written in the reigns of Henry VI. and Edward IV,, except a 
few that extend as far as Henry VII., by different members of a wealthy and respectable, but 
not noble, family ; and are, therefore, pictures of the life of the English gentrj' of that age.' 

THE MORNING POST : ' A reprint of Mr. James Gairdner's edition of The Paston 
Letters with some fresh matter, including a new introduction. Originally published in 
1872-75, it was reprinted in 1895, and is now again reproduced. The introductions have 
been reset in larger type, and joined together in one, conveniently broken here and there by 
fresh headings. The preface is practically a new one. ... It is highly satisfactory for 
readers who care about history, social or political, to have this well-printed and admirably 
introduced and annotated edition of these famous letters.' 

MANCHESTER GUARDIAN : *One of the monuments of English historical scholar- 
ship that needs no commendation.' 



The Stall Plates of the Knights of 
the Order of the Garter 1 348-1485 

Consisting of a Series of 9 1 Full-sized Coloured Facsimiles 
with Descriptive Notes and Historical Introductions by 

W. H. ST. JOHN HOPE, M.A., F.S.A. 

Dedicated by gracious privilege during her lifetime to Her 
Late Majesty QUEEN VICTORIA, Sovereign of the 
Most Noble Order of the Garter. 

'The edition is strictly limited and only 500 copies of the work 
have been printed. 

The object of the work is to illustrate the whole of the 
earlier Stall Plates, being the remaining memorials of the four- 
teenth and fifteenth century of Knights elected under the 
Plantagenet Sovereigns from Edward the Third, Founder of 
the Order, to Richard the Third, inclusive, together with three 
palimpsest plates and one of later date. 

The Stall Plates are represented full-size and in colours on 
Japan vellum, in exact facsimile of the originals, in the highest 
style of chromolithography, from photographs of the plates 

Each plate is accompanied by descriptive and explanatory 
notes, and the original and general characteristics of the Stall 
Plates are fully dealt with in an historical introduction. 

There are also included numerous seals of the Knights, repro- 
duced by photography from casts specially taken for this work. 

The work may be obtained bound in half leather, gilt, 
price net ; or the plates and sheets loose in a portfolio, 

loj. net ; or without binding or portfolio, net. 

JTHENj^UM : * It is pleasant to welcome the first part of a long 
promised and most important heraldic work, and to find nothing to say of it 
which is not commendatory. The present part contains ten coloured facsimiles 
out of the ninety plates which the work will include when completed. They 
reflect the greatest credit on all concerned in their production,' 

MORNING POST : * There is a fine field for antiquarian research in the 
splendid collection of heraldic plates attached to the stalls in the choir of St. 
George*s Chapel, Windsor Castle, and it will be a matter of satisfaction to all 
who are interested in old memorials that Mr. W. H. St. John Hope has given 
close examination to these ancient insignia and now presents the results of his 
investigations, with many reproductions.' 






Edited by 


Imperial 8vo. 

Edition limited to 500 copies of which only a few remain. 

Price 3U. dd. net. 

This work is an attempt to illustrate the history of the 
coronation of the Sovereigns of England from the earliest 
times to the present. Twenty-nine documents have been 
collected ; and, so far as possible, the transcripts have been 
made from contemporary manuscripts. 

A translation has been added to the Latin and Anglo- 
French documents. 

Mr. W. H. St. John Hope has written a note on the 
' Cap of Maintenance,' in which he has described the history 
and manner of the investiture of peers. 

The whole work constitutes a full collection of coronation 

The illustrations include a reproduction in colours of the 
picture of an English coronation at Corpus Christi College, 
Cambridge, and a photogravure of the coronation of St. 
Edmund in a manuscript belonging to Captain Holford; and 
also reproductions in collotype from the manuscript life of 
St. Edward in the University Library at Cambridge. The 
Crown of Queen Edith, which is represented from a portrait 
of Queen Henrietta Maria in the National Portrait Gallery, 
has not, it is thought, been noticed before. A feature of the 
illustrations will be the coronation chair which has been taken 
from the block cut for the late Sir Gilbert Scott's Gleanings 
from Westminster Abbey ; and there are also three plates show- 
ing the coronation robes of Queen Victoria. 

ATHEN^UM : * Among the minor compensations for the prolonged delay incident to 
a modern act of crowning is the time that it affords for the production of such an important 
historical treatise as that which has just been produced by Mr. Wickham Legg. In this hand- 
some volume we find brought together every historical document of importance that bears on 
the question of English coronations from that of Aidan in the sixth century to that of Victoria 
thirteen centuries later.' 






With numerous Illustrations, and an Introduc- 
tion by The Editor 

Dedicated by Permission to 
His Grace The Duke of Northumberland 

2 vols, large 8vo, price £i is, net 

Also a Large Paper Edition limited to 150 copies 

£z ^^et 

The following is a list of some of the Illustrations included in 

in ' The House of Percy * : 

Alnwick Castle, Bamborough Castle, from drawing by 
Herbert Railton. Portrait of Henry Percy, ist Earl of 
Northumberland — the ^ Earl Percie * of Chevy Chase (repro- 
duced in colours from a contemporary MS.). Portrait of 
Henry, 7th Earl of Northumberland. The Village of Perci in 
Normandy : the cradle of the race. Syon House, Northum- 
berland House, from drawings by Herbert Railton. The full 
armorial bearings of the present Duke of Northumberland in 
colours. Various shields, signatures, and facsimile letters. 

NEWCASTLE LEADER : ' The history is admirably illustrated 
with clever drawings by Herbert Railton, elaborate reproductions of 
the arms, crests, escutcheons, and pedigrees of the Percy family and 
its branches. Of course Alnwick Castle comes in for special treat- 
ment, and Mr. Railton is at his best in his sketches of that famous 





By the Right Hon. 

2 vols, large 8vo, price is, net 


Also a Large Paper Edition limited to 150 copies 

^3 3x. net 

The following is a list of some of the Illustrations in * The 

House of Douglas ' : 

Full-page Illustrations — Tomb of Sir James Douglas 
in St. Bride's. Arms of Douglas and Moray from Bothwell 
Castle. Tomb of Margaret, Countess of Douglas, in 
Lincluden. Arms of the Douglas Family in Lincluden 
College. Tomb of James * the Gross,' 7th Earl of Douglas, 
in St. Bride's (two plates). Tantallon Castle. Morton Castle. 
Thrieve Castle. Tomb of the i st Earl and Countess of Morton 
in Dalkeith Church. Portrait of the 6th Earl of Angus, from 
the Tudor Portraits in Westminster Palace, painted from a 
picture in Windsor Castle. Portrait of the 13th Earl of 
Home, photo from portrait. Portrait of Lady Margaret 
Douglas. Hermitage Castle. James, Earl of Morton (litho- 
graphed from an original drawing). 

Also various Coats of Arms in colours^ and numerous Seals and Signatures. 

THE TIMES : ' No more suitable beginning for the series could 
have been found. ... A valuable and important contribution to 
Scottish History. Brightly written . . . judgments wise and sane 
. . . narrative smooth and vigorous . . . powers of description un- 
questionable. A real addition to an important and interesting subject.' 

ATHENMUM : *The author has executed his task clearly and 
well. . . . Numerous and well-executed shields of arms, etc. A 
valuable work of reference, well printed. The author has the gift of 
an easy narrative style.' 




The first English Translation of Chateauhriand' s Famous 
Autobiography — ' Les Memoirs d outre T mbe ' 




Vicomte de Chateaubriand 
Sometime Ambassador 
to England 

Illustrated with Contemporary Portraits. In 6 vols. 
Purple clothj gilt top, price £^ los, net 

Portrait of Francois Rene, Vicomte de Chateaubriand 
{frontispiece). The Chateau de Combourg. Chateaubriand's 
birthplace, at St. Malo. Portraits of Louis XVIII. ; Marie 
Antoinette ; Malsherbes ; Mirabeau ; General Washington ; 
Madame de Chateaubriand, wife of the Author ; the Baron de 
Breteuil ; the Comte de Rivarol ; Frederic William II. ; Pel- 
tier, Editor of Les Actes des Apbtres ; Napoleon Buonaparte ; 
the Comte de Montlosier ; the Abbe Delille ; L. M. de 
Fontanes ; Burke ; Pitt ; and George III. 

This noblest of nineteenth-century biographies covers the whole eighty 
years of the distinguished author's life, — his career at the court of Louis XVI., 
— his emigration to America upon the outbreak of the Revolution, — wander- 
ings among the North-American Indians, — return to France, — service in the 
Royalist Army, — days of poverty in London, — literary and diplomatic career 
under Napoleon I., — resignation of the Valais Legation upon the murder of 
Due d'Enghien, — journey in the East, — attacks upon Napoleon, — the history 
of the First Restoration, — of Chateaubriand's Embassy to Sweden, — of the 
Hundred Days which Chateaubriand spent with Louis XVIII. at Ghent. 

The Second Restoration is fully described, and Chateaubriand writes of 
his peerage,- — of the assassination of the Due de Berry, — of his Embassy to 
Berlin and life in that capital, — of his Embassy to London, — of his relations 
with George IV. and his Ministers, — of English Society at that period, — of 
the suicide of Lord Londonderry, — of the death of Louis XVIII. and acces- 
sion of Charles X., — of his conduct in opposition, as Minister of Foreign 
Affairs, and as Ambassador to Rome, — of Roman Society, ancient and modern ; 
of his interviews with Popes Leo XII. and Pius VIII., of the Papal Con- 
claves. He writes in full detail of the fall of the Polignac Ministry, the 
Revolution of July, and the usurpation of Louis-Philippe 


The Old Court Suburb 



Edited, with an Introduction and Notes, by AUSTIN DOBSON 

With very numerous Photogravure and other Illustrations by Herbert 
Railton, Claude Shepperson, and Edmund J. Sullivan 

2 vols., large square 8vo, price ^^i is, net 

Edition de Luxe 
Signed by the Artists, and limited to 150 copies, price £4. 45. net. 

Kensington (the Old Court Suburb) was still, at the beginning of the 
nineteenth century, in the country, and the garden of Wilberforce, who 
occupied Gore House from 1808 to 1825, is described as being *full of 
lilacs and laburnums, nightingales and swallows.' 

* The way to it (Kensington) is the pleasantest out of town ; you may 
walk in high road, or on grass, as you please ; the fresh air salutes you from 
a healthy soil, and there is not a step of the way, from its commencement at 
Kensington Gore to its termination beyond Holland House, in which you 
are not greeted with the face of some pleasant memory.' 

ATHEN^UM : * To produce a good old book and make it a new one without offence 
is a great feat. . . . Mr. Austin Dobson was the very man to write the graceful introduction 
and brief notes. . . 

Gilbert White's Selborne 

Edited by Dr. R. BOWDLER SHARPE 

The hitherto unpublished * Garden Kalendar,' to which the Very 
Rev. Dean Hole has written an Introduction, is included 

Illustrated by E. J. Sullivan, J. G. Keulemans, and Herbert Railton 

Price, 2 vols, large 8vo, £2 2s, net. 

COUNTRY LIFE : * The Edition of "The Natural History and Antiquities of 
Selborne and A Garden Kalendar," issued in two volumes, is a work so modestly beautiful, 
and so precious, that the reviewer approaches it with awe. . . . The topographical pictures 
by Mr. Herbert Railton of the familiar objects at Selborne — Norton Farm, the Plestor, 
the Street, the Church, the Yew Tree, and so forth — are as good as can be, the very 
perfection of delicate work. Birds and beasts have fallen to the lot of Mr. J. G. Keule- 
mans, and, short of colour, I have never seen anything of the kind nearly as good as they 
are. The birds are, perhaps, a trifle more perfect than the beasts. Of full-page illustrations 
there are fifty ; of minor illustrations a good number. . . . Altogether this is a very com- 
plete and worthy edition, and it is destined to be the family Bible of those who follow the 
cult of Gilbert White, and the number of them increases every day.' 



Illustrated Edition of 

The Works of William 

In 20 Imperial i6mo Volumes with coloured Title Page and 
end papers designed by Lewis F. Day, and a specially 
designed Coloured Illustration to each Play, the artists 
being: L. Leslie Brooke, Byam Shaw, Henry J. Ford, 
G. P. Jacomb Hood, W. D. Eden, Estelle Nathan, 
Eleanor F. Brickdale, Patten Wilson, Robert Sauber, 
John D. Batten, Gerald Moira, and Frank C. Cowper. 

The Title Page and Illustrations printed on Japanese vellum. 
Cloth gilt extra, gilt top, gilt back with headband and book- 
marker, 25. 6d, net each volume. Each volume 

sold separately 
Price per set of 20 volumes, £,2 los, net. 

ATHENJEUM ; * Well produced, the convenience and comfort of the reader having been 
fully considered.' 

PALL MALL GAZETTE ; 'Beautifully printed in bold sizeable type upon good paper, 
and bound in handsome dark red cloth.' 



Edited by AUGUSTINE BIRRELL and Illustrated with 100 
Portraits selected by Ernest Radford. 6 Vols. Red 
buckram, label, gilt top, 36J. net. Sold in Sets only. 
This Edition is limited to 700 copies for sale in this 

TIMES : * The distinctive feature is the series of portraits of the actors on Boswell's 
stage. Of these there are loo, carefully selected by Mr. Ernest Radford, who writes an excel- 
lent introduction to explain his method of selection. The portraits have been well reproduced, 
and their tone is generally soft and pleasing.' 

DAILY CHRONICLE X *The whole of his (Mr. Birrell's) appreciation of the book's 
value and its causes — the size (" it is a big book "), Boswell's perfection of method, his genius 
for portraiture, his immense pains, his freedom and glorious intrepidity — all this is excellently 
done, with due brevity and orderliness. . . . The Edition is supplied with a series of portraits, 
about sixteen to each volume. They have been carefully selected by Mr. Ernest Radford, 
Mr. Birrell's colleague, we believe, in the first volume of Obiter Dicta. He writes a Preface 
giving an account of his selection, and a history of many of the portraits. The volume is light, 
well bound, and altogether satisfactory.' 




Time Table of Modern 
History A.D, 400-1870 

Compiled and arranged by M. MORISON. i6o pp., 
about 15 in. X 12 in. i2s, 6d, net. 

CONTENTS Parallel Vertical Tables — Genealogical Tables — Ruling 
Monarclis — General Chart of Ancient and Modern Histor)- — Index — 
Maps — Europe showing the Barbarian Invasions: Europe, a.d. 451 ; 
Europe, A. D. 476; Europe, a.d. 500; Europe, a.d. 768-814; Europe, 
A.D. 962 ; Europe showing the spread of Christianity, circa 1000 ; 
Europe, a.d. 1360 ; Europe, a.d. 1648; Europe, a.d. 1740 ; Central 
and Eastern Europe, 18 14-1863. 

The work is an epitome of Modern History, 400-1870, 
and constitutes a book of reference invaluable to historical 
students. Facts and dates in the history, not of Europe 
alone, but also of Asia and America, are dealt with. 

The tables consist of parallel vertical columns, each column 
containing a history of one of the important nations of the 
world during the period covered. 

The work also contains a series of the more important 
European Genealogical Tables, complete list of ruling 
Monarchs and Popes, a chart showing a bird's-eye view of 
ancient and modern history, and a full index. Added to these 
are a series of Maps showing the barbarian migrations over 
Europe, the spread of Christianity and the various important 
territorial changes which have taken place in Europe since the 
year 400 a.d. 

THE SCHOOLMASTER : *This is a most valuable book of reference for teachers and 
students of history. . . . We can heartily recommend it as a work of real usefulness.' 
THE ACADEMY : 'A most valuable book, and almost deserves the adjective "monumen- 
tal." It is a compendium of historical dates viewed from almost every possible aspect. No 
student should think his shelves complete without this uniquely valuable book.' THE 
DAILT NEfVS : *To the professional historian this volume will prove a convenient " ready 
reckoner " ; to the amateur it will come as a boon and a blessing.' WESTMINSTER 
GAZETTE : 'The information is given in the clearest type, with ample margins, and as a 
book of reference it is one of the easiest to consult with the assurance of satisfactory results' 
THE GUARDIAN 'Remarkably accurate. . . . We can conscientiously recommend the 
book as a companion to the histories of Europe.' 



. 220